Total July volume, at 1,680,569 units, posted a 5.3% annual gain, trailing June’s 11.6% increase and topping May’s 4.4% increase.

Trailers, at 41,576, headed up 6.4% annually, and domestic containers, at 814,855, posted a 12.3% annual gain. All domestic equipment, which is comprised of trailers and domestic containers, at 856,431, rose 12.0% annually. ISO, or international, containers, at 824,138, fell 0.9%.

Through the first seven months of 2026, IANA reported that total volume, at 11,045,747, increased 2.9% annually. Domestic containers, at 5,354,977, were up 8.2% annually, and trailers, at 274,848, saw a 3.3% annual gain. All domestic equipment, at 5,629,825, was up 7.9%. ISO containers were the lone sector to see a decline, at 5,415,922, for a 1.8% annual decrease.

In IANA’s recently-issued Intermodal Volume Index (IVI), the organization’s findings pointed to annual growth remaining intact.

The North America IVI made its debut in May, with IANA describing it as a measure of industry activity that provides a “most likely” estimate of current market conditions. 

The August IVI estimate, at 101.3, trailed July by 2.8% and was also behind June’s 107.7. In explaining the IVI’s methodology, IANA said that the IVI “gauges what is happening right now—before the official monthly figures are published.” And it added that it translates a high-frequency freight activity onto the same scale as the published index, giving shippers, carriers and analysts an early snapshot of current-month demand.

“The August estimate, though down, reads as a continuation of the strength that we've seen for much of the 2026," said Andrew Sibold, Director of Economics. "Although this month's forecast carries a bit more uncertainty, we're seeing no reason for any near-term reversal of the positive trend we've seen this year.”

Intermodal has been strong throughout 2026, aided by high energy prices related to the respective conflicts in Iran and Ukraine, as well as various federal government measures and initiatives, largely focused on driver CDL requirements in various forms, which have, in turn reduced driver capacity.

IANA’s Sibold recently told LM that while higher energy prices have served as a driver for some shippers in switching to intermodal—with the caveat that there are other factors at play, too.

“Diesel prices are a factor, but the labor supply shortage that is happening in trucking has been the primary driver of that shift, I think,” he said. “And I expect that to continue in the future, especially during this administration. There is no reason that will change over the next two-to-three years, with the same going for diesel prices. Even if there is a durable ceasefire, it is likely that diesel prices will remain elevated just because that risk now that needs to be factored in.”

As trucking capacity has exited the market, due in large part to a supply-side contraction, that led to shippers figuring out where that capacity is going to be coming from, in order to meet their needs, according to Rick LaGore, CEO InTek Intermodal Logistics. He also noted shippers need to pay close attention to future capacity shifts, for both intermodal and trucking, should demand return in a meaningful way.

“Shippers need to be paying attention to these dynamics earlier than later and plan for them,” said LaGore. “It definitely falls into a plan for the worst and hope for the best-type of situation. Intermodal currently presents a great opportunity for shippers to find capacity, particularly in tight-capacity markets that exist today. There are really some green shoots in intermodal today, which go back to what is happening on the truckload side, where we are seeing significant price increases as well as capacity issues. The natural place for shippers to go, if that is what they are seeing, is for them to transition more of their freight over to intermodal.”

USPS said that this planned peak season change was approved by the Postal Service’s Board of Governors and be applied to various retail and commercial domestic competitive parcels:  Priority Mail Express (PME), Priority Mail (PM), USPS Ground Advantage, and Parcel Select, with no other products or services being affected. Pending favorable review by the PRC, USPS said the temporary rates would go into effect at 12 a.m. CT on Oct. 4 and remain in place until 12 a.m. CT on Jan. 17, 2027.

“This seasonal adjustment will bring prices for the Postal Service’s retail and commercial customers in line with competitive practices,” said USPS. “As a part of the Postal Service’s transformation plan, these temporary changes will support the organization in achieving our public service mission—providing a nationwide, integrated network for the delivery of mail and packages at least six days a week—in a cost-effective and financially sustainable manner over the long term, just as the U.S. Congress has intended.”

The largest of the proposed price changes are directed towards heavier packages and long-distance shipments:

• retail rate increases from around $0.30-to-$20.80, based on service, zone, and package weight;
• commercial rate increases ranging from around $0.40-to-$18.20, with Parcel Select increases up to $2.35;
• lightweight package increases largely under $1-to-$2;
• heavy packages, ranging from 26 pounds-to-70 pounds and oversize shipments see the largest increases, for Zones 5-9; and
• Large Flat Rate Box increases between $1.75-$2.10, with other Flat Rate products rising by roughly $0.85-$1.00

Paul Yaussy, head of parcel contract intelligence, at Loop, told LM that on the surface, this looks like a roughly 2%-to-10% temporary increase on Priority Mail commercial rates and is not flat across the board—adding that the proposed increased are front-loaded toward lightweight packages and especially longer zones, where the USPS still often holds advantages over other alternative carriers in both rate and service. And for Ground Advantage (comprised of two-to five- day service standards for packages up to 70 pounds, including three services—USPS Retail Ground, Parcel Select Ground, and First-Class Package Service—into the Ground Advantage service) rates, he said it is roughly a 5%-to-8% increase

“USPS is doing what FedEx and UPS have done for years: carving out a peak surcharge window instead of baking holiday costs into base rates,” explained Yaussy. “The difference is that USPS is calling it a filed 'temporary rate' subject to PRC review, which gives them regulatory cover the other parcel carriers don't need for their peak surcharges. For shippers, the real story isn't the surcharge itself; it's the stacking effect. If you're already absorbing FedEx/UPS peak surcharges, this adds a third layer of peak cost variability to plan for.  Assuming USPS is still your low-cost provider compared to FedEx or UPS after this increase might be a mistake and this will require some analysis on every shipper's part. It's also worth watching to see if the rates simply become permanent as part of an overall USPS strategy to become more solvent once the ‘temporary’ tag expires.  Either way, shippers should plan for significant annual increases during peak, regardless of their primary and secondary carriers.”

In looking at the proposed peak season price increases, Dave Sullivan, Director of Professional Services at ShipScience, observed in a customer update that shippers should model the increase using current, post-billed July weights and their actual product and zone mix, as opposed to relying on last year’s package weights. Sullivan also noted that parcels currently billing near 24 pounds-to-27 pounds, especially for low-density packages exceeding one cubic foot, deserve immediate review because a relatively small dimensional or packaging change could move them into the highest temporary-increase band.

“Repacking to reduce dimensional weight may provide savings, but splitting one package into two should not be assumed to lower cost because it creates two base postage charges and two temporary price increases,” wrote Sullivan. “Priority Mail Flat Rate and Parcel Select may reduce incremental peak exposure for certain shipments, but comparisons should be based on total postage, packaging and entry requirements, service needs, and eligibility—not solely on the holiday increase. USPS-produced Flat Rate packaging is required for Flat Rate pricing.

For cubic-priced shipments, the holiday filing maps Priority Mail Cubic tiers 1–3 to the 0–3 lb. increase and tiers 4–5 to the 4–10 lb. increase. USPS Ground Advantage Cubic tiers 1–3 map to 0–3 lbs., tiers 4–9 to 4–10 lbs., and tier 10 to 11–25 lbs. Peak pricing will remain in effect for the first 16 days of January, with the lower post-expiration prices beginning January 17. Shippers operating under Negotiated Service Agreements should also confirm how the temporary price adjustments are treated under their specific terms.”

In its fiscal third quarter earnings announcement earlier this month, USPS said quarterly operating revenue, at $19.9 billion, fell 6.1% annually, following a 2.3% annual fiscal second quarter gain. And its net loss under generally accepted accounting principles came in at $2.5 billion, down from $3.1 for the same quarter a year ago, while steeper than a $2.0 billion fiscal second quarter loss.

Operating revenue, at $19.9 million, headed up 6.1%, or $1.1 billion, annually, paced by what USPS described as ongoing growth in its USPS Ground Advantage Shipping and Packages subcategory and also gains in Marketing Mail. What’s more, it added that operating revenue gains were supplemented by First-Class Mail and Marketing Mail price hikes, as well as a transportation-related, time-limited price increase that took effect on April 26, for various Shipping and Packages category offerings, which it noted were partially offset by declining First-Class Mail and Shipping and Packages volume declines.

In the spirit of that connection, I have some sad news to share.

We received word last week that our former colleague Roberto Michel lost his courageous battle with cancer. He was 66 years old. Following his diagnosis, Roberto retired in April after a career spanning nearly three decades covering software, materials handling and manufacturing trends.

Roberto was a well-known and loved contributor to Modern since the early 2010s and was our full-time senior editor since 2020. He was known for his thoughtful coverage of warehouse software systems, robotics, lift trucks and automation technologies. Before he joined our team, he was the chief editor of Manufacturing Business Technology magazine. He was a bit of an industry icon.

But Roberto was also way more than that.

He was an avid reader (he carried a degree in English Literature from the University of Oregon and a master’s in journalism from Marquette) and loved the outdoors, biking, fishing and cooking/grilling. Smart, quick witted, humble and good company, he was truly not only a professional, but someone you wanted to have interesting conversations with.

He had a gift for explaining the most complex ideas and systems in a simple, digestible way. Roberto always brought a seasoned ability to get to the heart of the story, whether that story was work-related or personal. He had a curiosity that just made him great.

I loved sending Roberto out to cover booth assignments at ProMat and Modex, because he would connect all the dots. It was not just the one product at the booth I sent him to. He always came back with a post-show report or blog tying multiple technologies and ideas together.

Roberto and I worked together in some capacity for 20 years at Modern, and after he joined our staff full-time in 2020, we truly became friends. I think we only met in person a handful of times, but he was a great teammate—thoughtful, kind and always willing to go the extra mile to make things better.

Roberto’s contributions to Modern and to our industry will no doubt leave a lasting impact. On behalf of all of us here at Peerless, I send our deepest sympathies and love to his wife, Karen, his family, and everyone in our industry who got to know him. I will miss him. He was one of the good ones.

“The Government of Canada has negotiated intensively and in good faith with the United States (U.S.) toward a fair and comprehensive trade agreement that would protect Canadian workers and their families, strengthen the economy, provide greater certainty for businesses, and respect Canada’s sovereignty,” stated the Department of Finance Canada. “In recent days, however, the U.S. proposed new terms that were not in Canada’s best interest, basically, asking too much of Canada, and offering too little in return. Canada therefore suspended negotiations rather than accepting a bad deal that would undermine Canadian workers, businesses, strategic sectors, and our national interest. Canada did not choose this trade conflict, but we need to respond to provide a level playing field to our businesses.”

Canada said that, effective September 8, counter-tariffs on various U.S. goods will go into effect, at 15%, 25%, and 50% on products drawn from those targeted by U.S. Section 338 and Section 232 tariffs, noting that the rate for each product will match the corresponding U.S. rate.

And it added that these counter-tariffs will apply to products covering $27.6 billion in U.S. imports, “and will focus on sectors such as steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, and electronics, that are most impacted by U.S. tariffs.” Looking at different sectors, Canada said that goods subject to 50% counter-tariffs include steel and aluminum products that were previously at a 25% counter-tariff, furniture, clothing, and apparel.

And it also said that goods subject to 25% tariffs include appliances, dairy products, such as cheese, fish and seafood, and certain steel and aluminum derivative products. Other existing counter-tariffs against the U.S., including autos, remain in place and Canada’s tariff remission framework also remains available to assess requests for exceptional relief. 

"Canada will match the new U.S. tariffs dollar for dollar," Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said in a social media post. "In addition, we are introducing $7.5 billion in new and enhanced measures to support Canadian workers and businesses. That builds on the nearly $25 billion in supports introduced since the implementation of the U.S. unjustified tariffs. Defending Canadian jobs, industries, and families.

The tariffs placed by the U.S. on Canada, which took effect on August 22, are on products ranging from cement, electronics, and packaging materials to furniture, dairy products, and industrial equipment. They apply to roughly 5% of Canadian exports to the United States.

The White House has not released a consumer-friendly product list, but officials said the tariffs apply across a broad range of Canadian goods. Examples include: industrial machinery; commercial refrigeration equipment; cement and other building materials; wine, beer and distilled spirits; hockey sticks and other sporting goods; and certain dairy products and ingredients.

The official proclamations identify affected products using Harmonized Tariff Schedule codes rather than plain-language product names.

Canadian exports that are exempt from the new U.S. tariffs include: energy products; potash; critical minerals; fish and seafood; and goods already covered by Section 232 tariffs, including steel, aluminum, copper and many auto parts.

Prior to the new U.S. tariffs on Canada taking effect on August 22, the White House pointed to various declines in U.S. exports to Canada as a driver for the new tariffs.

As examples, it observed that exports of U.S. motor vehicles fell 22%, or $5.6 billion, from April 2025 through March 2026 compared to the same period over 2024 to 2024, while exports of motor vehicles from other countries into Canada have gone up, offsetting the previous demand that came from the U.S. And for alcoholic beverages, it said that with the exception of two Canadian provinces and territories, all others have ceased the purchase, distribution, or retailing of U.S. alcoholic beverages and have not imposed similar restrictions on other countries. For the period from March 2025 to February 2026, the White House said that From April 2025 through March 2026, Canadian imports of U.S. motor vehicles decreased by approximately 22%, or $5.6 billion, compared to the same period in 2024-2025. Exports of motor vehicles from other countries to Canada have increased to meet the demand previously filled by U.S. exports.  

All but two Canadian provinces and territories have halted the purchase, distribution, or retailing of U.S. alcoholic beverages, and have not imposed similar restrictions on other countries. From March 2025 through February 2026, Canadian imports of U.S. alcoholic beverages decreased by about 81%, or $582 million, compared to the same period in 2024-2025.

Following the breakdown in U.S.-Canada trade negotiations, President Trump said the U.S. would impose 50% tariffs on Canadian automotive products and steel, effective January 1, 2027, for cars and trucks made in Canada, Canadian auto parts, and Canadian steel and alumimum. 

Andrew Caridas, a partner at Washington, D.C.-based Ashurst Perkins Coie, whom has more than two decades of experience advising clients on international trade regulations, said prior to the negotiations reaching a stalemate, the most important takeaway is that the new Section 338 duties apply regardless of whether goods qualify under USMCA.

“Companies that previously had largely ignored USMCA and its predecessor NAFTA—because U.S. duties on Canadian products were low in any event—have spent six years building compliance programs around origin certification, and that certification does not help here,” said Caridas. “A shipment can be fully USMCA-originating and still carry the additional 50% duty.”

And he added that another thing to keep in mind for shippers is that coverage depends on HTS code, not broadly by industry. There are roughly 554 eight-digit HTS classifications across the three proclamations, and the motor vehicles action in particular reaches well beyond vehicles: cement, furniture, fishing rods, hockey equipment.

In a research note, Chris Rogers, Head of Supply Chain Research, at S&P Global Market Intelligence, observed that the talks held between the U.S. and Canada were about more than only the Section 338 tariffs, with the USMCA negotiations also now on hold, which extends supply chain investment uncertainties for shippers.

“It is unlikely that USMCA will be abandoned given the importance to both sides, including an expected 63.6% of Canada’s non-energy exports and 18.0% of U.S. non-energy exports in 2027, although Canada’s export economy is steadily becoming less reliant on the U.S.,” stated Rogers.

Supply Chain 24/7 Editorial Director Andy Gray contributed to this report. 

The “Curve” was initially released by Coyote Logistics in 2018, with Coyote subsequently acquired by UPS in August 2015, and then sold to RXO in September 2024. The Curve is a proprietary forecasting model that helps shippers and carriers position themselves for success regardless of market conditions. And it measures three concurrent cycles-seasonal demand, annual procurement and more elusive market capacity–to help supply chain professionals identify recurring patterns that can lead to better informed supply chain and logistics decisions.  

The report’s primary observations were:

• truckload spot rates (linehaul only, excluding fuel) increased 32.4% annually, topping the first quarter’s 16.5% annual gain, for its highest annual and sequential increases, going back to the second quarter 2021;
• truckload contract rates were up 6.0% annually and up 2.4% sequentially;
• through August 21, the Curve is on track to end up the third quarter at a higher mark than the second quarter;  
• all-in rates (the actual amount paid to carriers rose to their highest level in four years;
• despite improving spot rates, carriers remained under significant cost pressure, exacerbated by higher fuel prices;
• federal policy enforcement has eliminated carrier capacity and the carrier market, leading to a noticeable reduction in the overall driver pool;
• the cost to operate a truck (excluding fuel) is up 29% compared to the last market peak in 2021;
• overall freight volumes remain muted

The report explained that the ongoing rate gains are due to the continued attrition of carrier capacity related to federal regulation enforcement and subsequently resulted in a supply imbalance relative to demand.

“In the second quarter, truckload spot rates rose at an even faster pace than in the first quarter and consistently outpaced contract rates, which put increased strain on shippers’ routing guides,” said Corey Klujsza, vice president of pricing and procurement at RXO. “That trend is not only continuing but picking up steam as we head into peak season. Though we’ve been in a year-over-year inflationary environment for over two years, the truckload market is starting to feel materially different.”

In an interview with LM, Jared Weisfeld, RXO chief strategy officer, explained that the two main themes—in both the report and for the market—continue to revolve around a very muted demand environment and a supply-driven economy that continues to take shape. For the former, he pointed to the Cass Freight Index, as a proxy for overall industry volume, which has seen annual declines for every single month since January 2023.

To that end, Weisfeld observed that this continues to be supportive of RXO’s view that supply continues to exit the market, given the myriad changes to federal enforcement, including May’s Supreme Court ruling in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport, an FMCSA rule closing CDL eligibility loopholes; a CDL mill crackdown; English Language Proficiency); and Chameleon Carrier Enforcement, among others.

“That is structural in nature, from our standpoint, in terms of the supply [capacity] that is coming out,” he said. “That is not likely to come back, coupled with the fact that spot rates on an annual basis have been up anywhere, depending on the week you are looking at, from 30%-to-50% annually. With demand doing what it's doing, I think that speaks to how fragile the market is from a supply-demand balance perspective, and any increase in demand has the ability to move rates meaningfully higher from here and introduce just more volatility in the market in terms of rate volatility.”

As far as how long a supply side recovery could be, Weisfeld noted that based on RXO’s estimates there could be as much as 20%-to-25% of overall supply coming out of the market, from a for-hire truckload perspective, labeling it “not an immaterial amount,” with the market currently halfway through that.

Looking at the third quarter and the remainder of the year, the report said that the amount of carrier capacity leaving the market, paced by the aforementioned federal government initiatives, represents what it views as the biggest structural change to the U.S. carrier market since industry deregulation in 1980, and to a steeper level than 2017’s ELD (electronic logging devices) mandate.

Addressing the lag in contract rates relative to the spot market, especially for larger enterprise-based shippers that go through different bid cycles that take time, Weisfeld said that ultimately it continues to be the case that carriers are needing to put through higher rates to reflect current market conditions, given how much capacity has exited the market.

“The reality is even though we're in a soft demand environment, you have reduced so much supply from an industry standpoint, where even though aggregate demand is still muted, you sort of think about that intersection between supply and demand, and you've reached that point where you have seen rate increases in terms of spot rates that are in the market…up about, 30 to 50% year over year. And when you think about what that means in terms of the contract market, the contract market is coming through on a lag basis. But I do think our view is, as we think about Q3, is that the market is likely to tighten between now and quarter-end peak. The question really is if it is going to be a function of what happens to consumer demand, which I don't know yet. Trying to predict consumer demand has been a fool's errand for a while, especially as relates yeah to freight demand.”

Those pressures and the strategies logistics leaders are using to address them will be a major focus of the 2026 NextGen Supply Chain Conference, taking place Oct. 21-23 at the W Nashville in downtown Nashville.

Logistics and fulfillment will represent one of several industry-focused paths attendees can follow throughout this year’s conference, alongside retail, food and beverage, and chemicals and pharmaceuticals. Across keynote presentations, fireside conversations, an executive panel and interactive Small Group Sessions, practitioners will share how new technologies and operating models are changing execution inside warehouses, transportation networks and customer fulfillment operations.

Ryder and BJC demonstrate the value of 3PL partnership

Thursday’s program will open with the NextGen Supply Chain End User Awards, including the Partnership in Execution Award for Ryder and BJC HealthCare.

Thys Visser, vice president of operations, healthcare and high tech at Ryder, and Jason Luby, vice president of value chain management and sourcing operations at BJC HealthCare, will discuss how the organizations’ redesigned healthcare logistics around patient outcomes.

Please click here to read the complete article. 

For the week of August 24, the national average headed up 19.8 cents to $5.652, following a near-identical 19.7-cent increase to $5.454, for the week of August 17, while also seeing its highest weekly average since the week of May 25, when it came in at $5.525.

This was preceded by the week of August 10, when the national average fell 9.1 cents to $5.257, following a 3.5-cent increase, to $5.348, for the week of August 3, and a 17.9-cent increase to $5.313, for the week of July 27. Prior to that, for the week of July 20, the national average price per gallon increased 33.8-cents, coming in at $5.134, marking the third-highest weekly increase on record (and matching the week of June 9, 2008), since EIA first began collecting this data.

This was preceded by a $1.058 increase to $4.796, for the week of July 13, which marked first weekly increase since a $0.001-cent decrease, to $5.639, for the week of May 11.

The national average price per gallon, for the week of July 6, fell 9 cents, coming in at $4.578 per gallon, following a 16.4-cent decrease, to $4.668, for the week of June 29, following a 22.7-cent decline, to $4.832, for the week of June 22, which snapped a 14-week stretch of the national average topping the $5.00 per gallon mark, going back to the week of March 16, when the national average was at $5.071 per gallon.

Prior to that, the national average, for the week of June 15, dropped 15.1 cents, to $5.059, following a 14.0-cent decline, to $5.210, for the week of June 8, a 17.3-cent decline, to $5.350, for the week of June 1, which marked steepest weekly decline since the week of April 20, when the national average fell 20.5 cents, from $5.608 to $5.403, for the largest weekly decline in more than three years, according to EIA data.

Before the week of May 4, the highest average price in any week since came during the week of May 9, 2022, when it was at $5.623 per gallon. Prices continue to remain elevated, due to the launched joint strikes by the United States and Israel, in an initiative geared towards halting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons.

On an annual basis, the national average is up $1.944, topping the $1.741 and $1.503 annual increases, for the weeks of August 17 and August 10, respectively. WTI crude is currently trading at $82.31 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, below the $85.00 reading a week ago at this time.

The tariffs cover products ranging from cement, electronics, and packaging materials to furniture, dairy products, and industrial equipment. They apply to roughly 5% of Canadian exports to the United States.

Canada now plans to introduce retaliatory tariffs on American products beginning Sept. 8, expanding the dispute to goods moving in both directions across the border.

“Canada will match Washington's new tariffs dollar for dollar in order to protect Canadian workers, farmers, families, and businesses,” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said.

Please click here to read the complete article. 

ATA’s move comes in the wake of the sudden resignation of Chris Spears in August.  ATA’s Board of Directors is charged with establishing a search committee to identify the organization’s next president and CEO.

The move comes at a tenuous time for the ATA and the various sized trucking companies it represents. Nearly all national trade organizations based in Washington have suffered from lack of funding during both Trump administrations as companies pull back from national lobbying to focus on state and local activities.

Greg Hodgen, the current ATA chairman of the board and CEO at bulk carrier Groendyke Transport Inc., said ATA is well positioned to continue its lobbying  efforts on behalf of the trucking industry during this latest leadership transition.

“Our work continues full speed ahead, and ATA will remain a strong, unified and effective voice for America’s trucking industry,” he said in a statement. Hodgen was scheduled to be replaced as ATA chairman by Derek Leathers, chairman and CEO of Werner Enterprises, a huge truckload carrier, during the ATA convention in October.

“As that process moves forward, our members can have full confidence in ATA’s leadership team and staff,” Hodgen said. “We have a clear mission, strong momentum and the people in place to execute.”

Spear became ATA’s ninth president in July 2016. His salary and total compensation for 2024, the last year for which IRS records are available publicly, was $3,014,727 in “reportable compensation.”

Spears succeeded Bill Graves, a former two-term governor of Kansas who retired after leading the federation for more than 13 years.

Of course, the most notable ATA leader was Thomas Donohue, who greatly expanded the ATA’s national lobbying effort, as chairman and president from 1984 through 1997 before leaving to run the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Donohue’s salary was a reported $3.7 million in total compensation during one of his latest years at ATA. That total compensation figure could include the cost of operating Donohue’s private jet, a source of consternation for some in Washington who viewed it as over the top.

Under Spear, ATA secured legislative victories for the trucking industry on many fronts, including highway infrastructure funding and workforce development. He also tirelessly worked to combat rising “nuclear verdicts” in wrongful death and injury lawsuits by aggressive plaintiffs’ attorneys.

ATA also moved its headquarters from suburban Arlington, Va., to its current location in downtown Washington, D.C. That was done to move ATA closer to policymakers and regulators on Capitol Hill.

A primary driver for that expectation was, and remains, the rapid escalation in energy prices. The average price per gallon of diesel gasoline has increased roughly 28% since the Iran conflict began, and the average price per barrel of WTI crude oil has increased by around 28%, for the same period.

But in the early days of the war, as energy prices began to quickly jump, a material shift by shippers to intermodal was slow to materialize. But that began to change for a few different reasons. One being an ongoing tightening in both trucking capacity and demand. What’s more, a research note published at the beginning of the Iran conflict by Baird & Co. analyst Daniel Moore observed that intermodal operates under what he called a distinct model that not only benefits economically from higher fuel prices, in that intermodal carriers are profitable on higher share, as well as increasing market share.

“Intermodal is roughly [around] 70% more fuel-efficient than traditional truckload, which means rising fuel costs widen its relative advantage and drive incremental volume,” wrote Moore.

To that end, it now appears that since then that more shippers are leveraging intermodal, due to the aforementioned rising energy prices and tighter trucking capacity, with the latter being largely related to various federal government actions related to non-domiciled CDL (commercial driver licenses) revocations and English language proficiency provisions, and increased oversight of driver training schools.

That was made clear in data provided to LM by the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA), which pointed to an 11.6% annual gain in June intermodal volumes, with year-to-date volume through June up 2.5% annually. This was also evident in data from the Association of American Railroads (AAR), which showed intermodal volumes up nearly 4% annually on a year-to-date basis through the week of August 8, with total July volume setting a new record for the month.

“Year-to-date intermodal volume through July this year is a record high,” said AAR Chief Economist Rand Ghayad. “That’s no accident. It reflects a combination of excellent current rail service levels; higher trucking costs associated with higher diesel prices and fewer available drivers; and continued strong consumer demand for goods. Together, those factors have put 2026 on pace to be the best year in intermodal history.”

Andrew Sibold, Director of Economics and Freight Policy, at IANA, explained that the Iran conflict has definitely played a role in the shift to intermodal, with energy prices being a driver—with the caveat that there are other factors at play, too.

“Diesel prices are a factor, but the labor supply shortage that is happening in trucking has been the primary driver of that shift, I think,” he said. “And I expect that to continue in the future, especially during this administration. There is no reason that will change over the next two-to-three years, with the same going for diesel prices. Even if there is a durable ceasefire, it is likely that diesel prices will remain elevated just because that risk now that needs to be factored in.”

As trucking capacity has exited the market, due in large part to a supply-side contraction, that led to shippers figuring out where that capacity is going to be coming from, in order to meet their needs, according to Rick LaGore, CEO InTek Intermodal Logistics. He also noted shippers need to pay close attention to future capacity shifts, for both intermodal and trucking, should demand return in a meaningful way.

“Shippers need to be paying attention to these dynamics earlier than later and plan for them,” said LaGore. “It definitely falls into a plan for the worst and hope for the best-type of situation. Intermodal currently presents a great opportunity for shippers to find capacity, particularly in tight-capacity markets that exist today. There are really some green shoots in intermodal today, which go back to what is happening on the truckload side, where we are seeing significant price increases as well as capacity issues. The natural place for shippers to go, if that is what they are seeing, is for them to transition more of their freight over to intermodal.”

Total volume, at 960,464 TEU (Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units), fell 5.82% annually, trailing the July 2025 record-month, which saw the impact of shippers front-loading cargo ahead of tariff changes while posting a 7.5% increase over the port’s five-year average for the month.

“After topping 1 million container units in June, we nearly reached that mark again in July,” said Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Gene Seroka. “Businesses continue to move cargo when they see windows of opportunity amid an evolving trade environment, while resilient consumer demand is helping keep imports at historically strong levels. We expect another strong month in August, although some cargo that traditionally arrives later in the season has already moved,” Seroka added. “Consumer demand remains the most important variable as we look toward the balance of the year.”

Imports, at 499,552 TEU, fell 8% annually and were 6% above the five-year July average, while on a year-to-date basis averaging more than 450,000 TEU per month, for a near record-high. And exports, at 111,776 TEU, were down 8% annually, with the port seeing annual declines in four of the last seven months, reflecting headwinds U.S. shippers continue to face in overseas markets.

Empty containers, at 349,137 TEU, saw a 2% annual decline, for its highest tally in a year and 12% above the five-year running average.

Through the first seven months of 2026, POLA volume, at 6,083,067 TEU, is up 1.8% annually.

On a POLA-hosted media call, Seroka said that the volume outlook over the coming months is steady.

“We have had two very strong months based on what we are seeing today and expect to handle more than 900,000 TEU in August,” he said. “That said, this pace won’t continue indefinitely. The National Retail Federation is forecasting strong imports nationwide in August, followed by a gradual moderation through the remainder of the year. That tracks with what we are seeing here. Some cargo that arrives traditionally later in the season has already moved. Even as the pace of cargo flow levels off, consumer demand remains the most important indicator. As long as people keep spending, there is a foundation for healthy cargo activity.”

To that end, he said that it is not just retail-focused, as POLA is hearing from customers about the continued movement of parts and components for American manufacturing, as well as some equipment supporting AI and data center development across the country. And he also observed that there are global factors at play, including the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea routes remaining unsettled, and also drought conditions potentially again constraining traffic through the Panama Canal—with each of these issues having the ability to quickly upend shipping patterns.

ATA reported that trucking tonnage fell 1% in July, following a 1.5% June gain, in its advanced seasonally-adjusted For-Hire Truck Tonnage Index.

ATA reported that its July Seasonally Adjusted (SA) For-Hire Truck Tonnage Index reading, at 113.5 (2015=100), fell 1.2%, from June’s 114.7 reading (which was revised from an original reading of 114.7), and was off 0.5% annually, steeper than June’s 1.2% annual decline. On a year-to-date basis, ATA said the index is up 1.4%, driven by what it called robust annual gains from February through April.

The ATA’s not seasonally adjusted (SA) For-Hire Truck Tonnage Index, which represents the change in tonnage actually hauled by fleets before any seasonal adjustment and the metric ATA says fleets should benchmark their levels with, came in at 117 in July, trailing June’s 118 by 0.9%.

"Tonnage levels have been choppy recently, and this trend was reflected in July’s decline,” said ATA Chief Economist Bob Costello.  "Aside from a couple pockets of strength, including the boom in data center construction for AI, freight has been lackluster. It is also true that the industry is seeing a recovery, but that is nearly all due to excess capacity leaving the market.”

For the week of August 17, the national average increased 19.7 cents, coming in at $5.454 per gallon, for its highest weekly average since the week of May 25, when it came in at $5.525.

This was preceded by the week of August 10, when the national average fell 9.1 cents to $5.257, following a 3.5-cent increase, to $5.348, for the week of August 3, and a 17.9-cent increase to $5.313, for the week of July 27. Prior to that, for the week of July 20, the national average price per gallon increased 33.8-cents, coming in at $5.134, marking the third-highest weekly increase on record (and matching the week of June 9, 2008), since EIA first began collecting this data.

This was preceded by a $1.058 increase to $4.796, for the week of July 13, which marked first weekly increase since a $0.001-cent decrease, to $5.639, for the week of May 11.

The national average price per gallon, for the week of July 6, fell 9 cents, coming in at $4.578 per gallon, following a 16.4-cent decrease, to $4.668, for the week of June 29, following a 22.7-cent decline, to $4.832, for the week of June 22, which snapped a 14-week stretch of the national average topping the $5.00 per gallon mark, going back to the week of March 16, when the national average was at $5.071 per gallon.

Prior to that, the national average, for the week of June 15, dropped 15.1 cents, to $5.059, following a 14.0-cent decline, to $5.210, for the week of June 8, a 17.3-cent decline, to $5.350, for the week of June 1, which marked steepest weekly decline since the week of April 20, when the national average fell 20.5 cents, from $5.608 to $5.403, for the largest weekly decline in more than three years, according to EIA data.

Before the week of May 4, the highest average price in any week since came during the week of May 9, 2022, when it was at $5.623 per gallon. Prices continue to remain elevated, due to the launched joint strikes by the United States and Israel, in an initiative geared towards halting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons.

On an annual basis, the national average is up $1.741, ahead of a $1.503 annual increase a week ago at this time. WTI crude is currently trading at $85.00 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

At the time, the White House explained that its rationale for moving forward with these tariffs is a response to what it views as discriminatory trade practices by Canada that affect U.S. exports, specifically for automobiles, alcoholic beverages, and dairy.

Other key aspects of these tariff actions cited by the White House were:

• each Section 338 proclamation imposes a 50% tariff on a different set of Canadian imports, covering products ranging from wine to hockey sticks to cement, including commercial refrigeration equipment, cement and other building materials, and certain dairy products and ingredients;
• these Section 338 tariffs apply to all covered goods regardless of whether a good originates under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA);
• these Section 338 tariffs will not apply to energy, potash, products subject to tariffs under Section 232, and certain other goods, such as fish or critical minerals; and
• the tariffs will take effect 30 days after signing and are designed to offset the burden and disadvantage on U.S. commerce from Canada’s discrimination

While the countries are currently in negotiations, in hopes of striking a deal that would prevent these tariffs from taking effect, the current status of the talks is unclear.

Jamieson Greer, ambassador of the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), said in a New York Times report that negotiators were reviewing options, adding that he expected Canada to drop certain measures it had already taken in response to U.S. tariffs.

“If a country retaliates against us, we’re obviously not going to tolerate that,” said Greer. “We’ll take action. My sense is the Canadians want to have a more conciliatory approach, but we’ll see.”

What’s more, the White House pointed to various declines in U.S. exports to Canada as a driver for the new tariffs.

As examples, it observed that exports of U.S. motor vehicles fell 22%, or $5.6 billion, from April 2025 through March 2026 compared to the same period over 2024 to 2024, while exports of motor vehicles from other countries into Canada have gone up, offsetting the previous demand that came from the U.S. And for alcoholic beverages, it said that with the exception of two Canadian provinces and territories, all others have ceased the purchase, distribution, or retailing of U.S. alcoholic beverages and have not imposed similar restrictions on other countries. For the period from March 2025 to February 2026, the White House said that From April 2025 through March 2026, Canadian imports of U.S. motor vehicles decreased by approximately 22%, or $5.6 billion, compared to the same period in 2024-2025. Exports of motor vehicles from other countries to Canada have increased to meet the demand previously filled by U.S. exports.  

All but two Canadian provinces and territories have halted the purchase, distribution, or retailing of U.S. alcoholic beverages, and have not imposed similar restrictions on other countries. From March 2025 through February 2026, Canadian imports of U.S. alcoholic beverages decreased by about 81%, or $582 million, compared to the same period in 2024-2025.

Chris Rogers, Head of Supply Chain Research, at S&P Global Market Intelligence, observed in a July research note that the implementation of the tariffs not a certainty.

“There may be a negotiating tactic ahead of United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) negotiations, which are focused in part on automotive rules of origin, potentially driving only a small response from Canada,” wrote Rogers. “The tariffs are also untested in law and have not been applied since the statute was first introduced in 1930.”

And he added that Canada has not retaliated against these measures, noting that its Prime Minister Mark Carney has referred to the tariffs a “direct violation” of the USMCA, but did not announce countermeasures, likely with the intention of further negotiation with the U.S. during likely upcoming USMCA talks, which are currently stalled.

“If the tariffs proceed, Canadian retaliation is likely, with higher tariffs likely placed on goods primarily produced in Republican-run states,” he said.

Andrew Caridas, a partner at Washington, D.C.-based Ashurst Perkins Coie, whom has more than two decades of experience advising clients on international trade regulations, said that if a deal between the U.S. and Canada is not reached, the most important takeaway is that the new Section 338 duties apply regardless of whether goods qualify under USMCA.

“Companies that previously had largely ignored USMCA and its predecessor NAFTA—because U.S. duties on Canadian products were low in any event—have spent six years building compliance programs around origin certification, and that certification does not help here,” said Caridas. “A shipment can be fully USMCA-originating and still carry the additional 50% duty.”

And he added that another thing to keep in mind for shippers is that coverage depends on HTS code, not broadly by industry. There are roughly 554 eight-digit HTS classifications across the three proclamations, and the motor vehicles action in particular reaches well beyond vehicles: cement, furniture, fishing rods, hockey equipment.

“So ‘does this affect me?’ is a classification question, not a sector question, and a lot of companies that don't deal in autos, dairy or alcohol will find themselves on the list,” he said. “This mean added or changing compliance burdens, and significant price competition pressure, in sectors of the Canadian economy that have been largely spared to date. In the immediate term the story is primarily about compliance: verifying import classifications against the annexes and considering entry timing. Over a longer horizon you are likely to see the same pattern as with other major tariff changes: dual sourcing, contract renegotiation over duty allocation and Incoterms, and closer attention to customs valuation. What I don’t expect to see quickly is wholesale re-sourcing away from Canada for affected HTS codes. Automotive components in particular cross the border several times before a vehicle is finished. That integration took thirty years to build and won’t be quick to unwind.”

When asked what things could look like if a partial deal were to be reached, Caridas explained that what is being discussed publicly is a tradeoff rather than a tariff reduction.

To that end, on the U.S. side, he pointed to suspending the Section 338 proclamations and easing the Section 232 duties on steel and aluminum. And on the Canadian side, he cited withdrawing retaliatory measures, lifting provincial bans on U.S. alcohol, movement on dairy quotas, and commitments on energy, critical minerals and defense.

“While it is possible we could see, say, 25% Section 338 tariffs based on partial concessions from Canada, the more likely scenario is selective suspension of one or more of the three Section 338 tariff measures depending on some perceived progress in negotiations regarding the corresponding Canadian measures,” he said. “My expectation, based on prior rounds of U.S. trade negotiations, is an interim or framework agreement rather than a comprehensive one: enough to stop the clock on Section 338 tariffs, but with the more difficult negotiations deferred to the USMCA review process.”

Many freight transportation and logistics executives and analysts consider the Cass Freight Index to be the most accurate barometer of freight volumes and market conditions, with many analysts noting that the Cass Freight Index sometimes leads the American Trucking Associations (ATA) tonnage index at turning points, which lends to the value of the Cass Freight Index.

What’s more, the Cass Transportation Index accurately measure changes in North American freight activity and costs based on $37 billion in paid freight expenses for the Cass customer base of hundreds of large shippers. 

The July shipments reading, at .983, fell 4.8% annually, steeper than June’s 4.1% annual decline, and were off 2.6% sequentially, its second straight sequential decline, which was preceded by a four-month stretch of sequential gains.

On a month-to-month seasonally-adjusted (SA) basis, shipments were down 2.6%, and on a two-year stacked-change basis, July shipments were down 11.4%. The report explained that a normal seasonal trend would put the shipments component of the index down roughly 3% annually in August.

“Some of the softness is the result of higher fuel prices, but to a large extent, volumes are still soft because capacity is declining,” wrote Tim Denoyer, the report’s author and ACT Research vice president and senior analyst. “The Cass data are trucking intensive, among other modes, but rail intermodal is gaining share from trucking this year, also pressuring this index.”

July expenditures, at 3.518, rose 9.1% annually, following an 11.2% June gain, which was mainly due to rate gains, and were up 9.6% on a two-year stacked change basis, while declining 3.4% sequentially.  On a month-to-month SA basis, July expenditures were down 2.1%.

“The [expenditures] slowdown was mainly due to lower volumes,” wrote Denoyer. “In SA terms, the index fell 2.2% sequentially after rising for eight straight months, on a 2.2% drop in shipments and a slight increase in rates. The expenditures component of the Cass Freight Index, after a record 38% surge in 2021 and another 23% increase in 2022, fell 19% in 2023 and 11% in 2024. In 2025, the index declined by 0.5%.”

Denoyer also noted in the report that the supply-led recovery continues, adding that with interest rates rising and fuel prices still elevated, the demand outlook remains under pressure, while pointing out that Class 8 tractor sales are set to rise above replacement levels in the coming months, which he said alleviates a market constraint—while real income growth slowing to almost zero and savings rates remaining worrying low remain concerns.

In a research note, Jeff Kauffman, Citizens Bank analyst, said that the report’s data continues to show a moderation in truck freight levels from strength earlier this spring.

“In our view, some of this reflects a modal shift, as shippers are taking freight off the highway and moving toward rail intermodal in an effort to lower costs,” wrote Kauffman. “We normally see a slowdown in shipment and expenditure activity in the summer months and coming off a period of spending driven by higher income tax refunds, World Cup spending, and higher fuel prices, it is not surprising to see this in the July data. We anticipate a pickup again in September following the back-to-school season and the beginning of the holiday shipping period.”

The SCI is a key logistics metric showing freight market health for shippers, combining factors like rates, capacity, and fuel; positive scores mean good conditions (more carrier supply), while negative scores signal tight capacity and tougher times for shippers, with readings near zero indicating neutrality, often fluctuating due to economic shifts and events like fuel price changes or new regulations. Recent readings have seen volatility, with shifts towards more challenging conditions as capacity tightens or improves, reflecting an evolving market where shippers need to monitor trends closely for rate changes and potential bottlenecks, according to FTR.

For June, the most recent month for which data is available, the SCI reading came in at -5.4. While still in negative territory, this represents a 10-point improvement over May’s -15.4 reading, which is among the six “least favorable” monthly readings going back to 2000, according to FTR.  The firm added that June marks the least negative index reading going back to January, citing stabilizing freight rates, and falling diesel prices, which reversed during July, were the main factors for the June decline.

“June’s SCI is great opportunity to acknowledge the limitations inherent in trying to use a numeric index to describe complicated situations,” said Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking. “Yes, the index ‘improved’ sharply, but that really means that overall market conditions are deteriorating for shippers at a much slower rate. That’s better than the alternative, of course, but it’s not great news. Prior to February, the index had not been more negative since May 2022. June’s SCI reading and FTR’s outlook suggest that shippers now are in a better position to address their challenges methodically rather than having to ‘drink from a fire hose,’ as the saying goes.”

Congress is currently considering the BUILD America 250 Act ahead of the Sept. 30, 2026 expiration of the current law. It is a five-year, $580 billion surface transportation reauthorization that focuses heavily on roads, bridges and freight.

This proposal follows the President Joe Biden-backed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), widely known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). Enacted in November 2021, this was a $1.2 trillion piece of legislation that was President Biden’s signature bill.

In a letter sent by 64 leading transportation groups—including the Chamber of Commerce, American Trucking Associations, Road & Transportation Builders Association, the National Urban League, among others—these leaders reminded Congress of the importance of federal investment in America’s roads and bridges.

“The federal government’s investment in our nation’s transportation network provides immense value to the American public,” the letter said. 

While these organizations still support a “full, robust reauthorization” of the federal surface transportation programs, they urged Congress to preserve the FY 2026 funding levels enacted for all federal transportation programs.

These include those programs funded through the Highway Trust Fund and advance appropriations, as part of and in the event of any short-term government funding measure or surface transportation program extension that may become necessary. 

Congress has many things on its to-do list. Most importantly, it must fund itself.

To prevent a government shutdown, both the House and Senate must pass identical funding legislation before the Sept. 30 deadline. The Senate was scheduled to recess from Aug.7 through Sept. 14. That leaves a limited number of legislative days before the end of the fiscal year.

If the Senate amends the House-passed measure, it would need to return to the House for approval before it could be sent to the president.

With a handful of legislative workdays remaining, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) was expected to bring a continuing resolution to the House floor this month to provide government funding from Oct. 1, the start of fiscal year 2027, through the November midterm elections.

Any decision by Congress to reduce funding to federal transportation programs as part of any short-term continuing resolution or extension of the surface transportation programs will inject uncertainty into state and local investment decisions. That potentially lead to delays in completing or commencing work on critical infrastructure projects that benefit the safety of our nation’s travelers, support our nation’s economy and help create and maintain important jobs, the transportation groups’ letter said.

“These decisions are better made during the full-year annual appropriations or surface transportation reauthorization debates,” the groups’ letter said.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the administration would like its transportation priorities included in any short-term extension if Congress is unable to pass a full surface transportation reauthorization before the deadline.

Randy Mullett, retired member of Con-way’s Executive Leadership Team and long-time D.C.-based transportation lobbyist, observed that BUILD is one of the most partisan transportation infrastructure-focused bills in decades, pointing to it passing nearly unanimously out of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee.

“I think that it's one of those things where common sense, common goals, and getting back to the basics of transportation, which are back to that safety and efficiency, is key,” he said. “Make capacity increases where we need them, keep bottlenecks at a minimum, and invest in those things that slow the system down. From a policy point of view, the focus on bottlenecks, a national freight network, and connectivity between modes are really important.”

Total July retail sales, at $763.6 billion were down 0.6%, from June to July, and rose 5.0% annually, Commerce reported. And it added that, from May through July, total sales increased 6.3% compared to the same period a year ago. July marks the 10th consecutive month of annual retail sales gains.

Non-store retail sales, which includes e-commerce, rose 10.2% annually on a year-to-date basis, and general merchandise sales rose 3.3%, for the same period.

Commerce’s data was in line with the new edition of the CNBC/NRF Retail Monitor, powered by Affinity Solutions, which was recently released. Data for this report is based on actual anonymized credit and debit card purchase data from Affinity Solutions and does not need to be revised on a monthly or annual basis.

The CNBC/NRF Retail Monitor found that total July retail sales, excluding automobiles and gasoline stations, saw a 0.32% seasonally-adjusted, sequential gain, while heading up 5.15% annually on an unadjusted basis, compared to 0.33% sequential and 9.41% annual gains in June.

For core retail sales, which the Retail Monitor describes as retail sales, excluding restaurants in addition to auto dealers and gas stations, rose 0.3% sequentially and 4.72% annually, compared to 0.36% and 10.08% sequential and annual gains in June.

And it added that retail sales total sales are up 6.57% annually through July, with core retail sales up 6.53%.

“Retail sales maintained their steady upward momentum in July as consumers kept shopping despite ups and downs in other economic indicators,” NRF President and CEO Matthew Shay said. “Supported by a low unemployment rate and steady wage gains, households remained budget conscious but took full advantage of midsummer sales and early back-to-school promotions to stretch their dollars. Retailers helped balance budgets by remaining committed to affordability, ensuring that everyday products remain accessible for American families.”

Looking at individual retail sales segments, the CNBC/NRF Retail Monitor observed that July sales rose in nearly every category it tracks:

• Electronics and appliance stores were down 0.05% month over month seasonally adjusted but up 12.04% year over year unadjusted;
• Digital products (such as electronic books and games) were up 1.21% month over month seasonally adjusted and up 12.02% year over year unadjusted;
• Health and personal care stores were up 0.53% month over month seasonally adjusted and up 10.07% year over year unadjusted;
• General merchandise stores were up 0.47% month over month seasonally adjusted and up 8.3% year over year unadjusted;
• Clothing and accessories stores were up 0.51% month over month seasonally adjusted and up 6.55% year over year unadjusted;
• Grocery and beverage stores were up 0.46% month over month seasonally adjusted and up 4.52% year over year unadjusted;
• Furniture and home furnishings stores were down 0.04% month over month seasonally adjusted but up 2.71% year over year unadjusted;
• Building and garden supply stores were down 0.17% month over month seasonally adjusted and down 1.2% year over year unadjusted; and
• Sporting goods, hobby, music and book stores were down 0.47% month over month seasonally adjusted and down 3.01% year over year unadjusted

NRF Vice President of Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jonathan Gold told LM in a recent interview that with retail sales showing relatively steady growth, it runs counter to softer consumer sentiment.

“Consumers continue to spend on retail goods,” he said. “Obviously, the tax refunds in March exceeded last year's refunds by over $20 billion spurring spending across discretionary and essential goods despite rising gas prices. Inflation remains elevated as tariffs and gas prices weigh on the cost of goods. Despite headwinds, consumers still are still out there spending.”

In a research note, Neil Saunders, Managing Director of GlobalData, observed that July marked another robust month for U.S. retail, despite inflation continuing to run hot across most of the retail sector.

“There is a legitimate question as to how such strong growth is being produced at a time when Americans feel relatively gloomy about the economy and are still broadly dissatisfied about the cost of living,” wrote Saunders. “Some of this, of course, is funded by a modest increase in debt—which see mostly come through in increased credit card balances. Unreported financial mechanisms, like buy-now-pay-later, are also seeing sharp rises. However, some is also being funded by a modest rise in real disposable income which a lot of consumers seem to be directing straight into spending rather than saving. Indeed, the savings ratio has fallen again in recent months. This may seem contradictory when set against a more cautious mindset but, from our research we also see an increasing attitude of throwing caution to the wind.

These dynamics suggest that while the levels of increase may not be sustained over the balance of this year and into next year, they are not entirely based on shaky foundations. It will likely take a more general and wider economic shock—which still cannot be discounted—to blow the consumer firmly off course.”

Rail carloads, at 231,628, posted a 1.8% annual gain, trailing the weeks ending August 1 and July 25, at 233,171, and 234,100, respectively.

AAR reported that eight of the 10 carload commodity groups tracked by AAR saw annual gains: grain, up 2,113 carloads, to 21,613; metallic ores and metals, up 1,710 carloads, to 22,955; and farm products excl. grain, and food, up 1,683 carloads, to 17,849. Commodity groups posting annual declines: were coal, down 3,766 carloads, to 57,976; and motor vehicles and parts, down 904 carloads, to 15,037.

Intermodal containers and trailers, at 295,356 units, increased 4.1% annually, topping the week of August 1, at 293,239 and the week of July 25, at 293,062.

Through the first 31 weeks of 2026, AAR reported that U.S. rail carloads, at 7,042,764, are up 2.7% annually, and intermodal units, at 8,713,571, are up 3.8% annually.

This represents the most recent sign of a high-profile group voicing opposition to the merger, with a five United States-based shipper groups— The Alliance for Chemical Distribution (ACD), American Chemistry Council (ACC), The Fertilizer Institute (TFI), and the National Industrial Transportation Group—also calling on the STB earlier this month to not approve the merger, stating that UP and NS have not provided enough information regarding the merger and its impact to enable the STB to “find it meets the statutory public-interest standard,” or prima facie (accepted as correct until showing otherwise).

In their letter, the state attorney generals—Austin Knudsen, Montana, James Uthmeier, Florida, Marty J. Jackley, South Dakota, Jonathan Skrmetti, Tennessee, Kris W. Kobach, Kansas, and Drew Wrigley, North Dakota—also cited similar concerns, over how the revised merger application UP and NS sent to the STB does not present a prima facie case.

“Attorney generals across the country have warned that this merger could reduce competitive options for shippers—a reduction that would ultimately increase costs for businesses and raise prices for consumers,” the letter stated. “At a time when the railroads are prospering financially, there is no reason to create a behemoth railroad that will take more money from farmers, shippers and ultimately consumers in our States and across the country. Under the Board’s rules, a major merger is appropriate for approval only where the applicants show that the merger will produce new or enhanced rail-to-rail competition, or other competitive benefits, and that those benefits outweigh the merger’s harms. This makes sense.  Railroads exert market power over farmers and local businesses that rely on rail to move their products to market.  The rail industry has already consolidated greatly in recent years, and Board-approved mergers receive immunity from antitrust challenges.  Any additional mergers of large railroads should proceed only where they will enhance rail-to-rail competition and clearly benefit shippers and the American public.”

As previously reported, the current status of the proposed merger remains pending before the STB and has yet to be approved, while it has advanced beyond the initial filing stage and is now in the regulatory review process, according to the STB.

On May 28, in a unanimous decision, the STB accepted the revised major merger application filed by UP and NS for consideration, in addition to a related application.

The STB said that this decision held the merger process in abeyance, or temporary suspension, including an environmental review of the transaction and ordered the railroads to submit supplemental information by no later than July 27.

On July 27, UP and NS took steps to enhance their merger application and submitted provided commitments to the STB that it said “go beyond those provided in any prior rail merger” and include supplemental information requested by the STB on May 28, when it accepted the merger application as complete.

The new, or expanded, commitments submitted by UP and NS include the following:

• New Competitive Opportunities. The combined railroad will significantly expand Committed Gateway Pricing (CGP), doubling the number of eligible shipments, and extending benefits to bulk unit train shippers. The expanded program is the functional equivalent of thousands of haulage agreements in a single enforceable commitment, creating even more opportunities for customers to benefit from the merger;
• Expanded Customer Protections. The railroads will preserve Class I rail options for 3-to-2 shippers as well as 2-to-1 shippers, where they can legally grant access to another railroad. No prior rail merger has included a similarly broad commitment to preserve 3-to-2 access;
• New Service Level Protections. In the unlikely event that service performance declines during merger integration, customers will be able to obtain temporary access to alternative rail service. This commitment provides an additional safeguard to help keep freight moving if unexpected service issues arise; and
• Stronger Oversight. If the merger’s public benefits are not being delivered in a timely manner, customers will gain access to a new rate relief process. Combined with the new integration period service protection, this new process provides added accountability to customers.

The state attorney generals pointed to Committed Gateway Pricing (CGP) as the sole competitive enhancement proposal, while explaining that it is flawed in the application and does not give any shipper access to a new railroad, adding that shippers do not gain anything beyond what they currently already have. Instead, it said that CGP sets a formula for calculating rates for certain interline movements with BNSF and CSX happening today and allow for some existing interlining to continue post-merger. Which they said is not new or enhanced competition, and that, at most, partially preserves an option that already exists.

Regarding CGP, they added: it would raise rates for many eligible shippers, with UP and NS setting the CGP rate at the 70^th percentile of UP/NS’s own rates for comparable traffic, rather than at a median price or a below-average level, with most eligible shippers receiving a CGP price higher than what they currently pay; UP and NS said CGP would not be competitive, with the companies saying CGP would not be single-line service and would not be as fast or reliable as single-line service; and CGP is De Minimis at scope.

In concluding the letter, the seven AGs said that a merger that creates a 50%-plus market share railroad cannot make a prima facie showing that it enhances competition without providing much more. 

“Too much is at stake,” they wrote. “Safe, efficient, cost-effective shipping is essential for the agriculture, mining, forestry, and manufacturing sectors, among many others. Competitive rail underlies the global competitiveness of the American economy.  In the absence of real competitive enhancements, UP and NS are attempting to sell this deal with empty promises of efficiencies and lower costs.  But history has consistently shown us that these rail mega-mergers deliver exactly the opposite to rural America: fewer routing options, higher captive freight costs, and catastrophic supply chain disruptions.  A deal that shifts power away from shippers to a monopoly railroad should be rejected out of hand.”  

In this exclusive, one-on-one webinar, Joseph Morris, CEO and Port Director with Port Everglades Department will unpack the latest regulatory changes, risk factors, and technology tools affecting cross-border operations.

He will explore strategies for improving compliance, reducing friction, managing landed cost, and building more resilient international supply chains.

Attendees will walk away with a clearer view of how today’s trade dynamics are impacting sourcing, transportation, and fulfillment.

The expanded site, located at Shenzhen Bao’an International Airport, can now process about 900 tons of shipments per day, three times its previous amount. DHL said the gateway will also create more than 1,000 jobs.

The company is also adding a new daily cargo flight connecting Shanghai, Bangkok, Bahrain, and Brussels. The route, flown with a Boeing 767 freighter, adds up to 50 tons of daily shipping space between China and markets across Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Europe.

Please click here for the complete article. 

The DAT Truckload Volume Index reflects the change in the number of loads with a pickup date during that month, with the actual index number normalized each month to accommodate any new data sources without distortion, with a baseline of 100 equal to the number of loads moved in January 2015. It measures dry van, refrigerated (reefer), and flatbed trucks moved by truckload carriers.

The July Van TVI, at 252, fell 11% compared to June and was flat annually, said DAT. The Reefer TVI, at 181, was down 5% compared to June and down 13% annually. And the Flatbed TVI, at 291, fell 12% compared to June and 4% annually. DAT said that these volume declines are in line with typical levels for that time of year, on the heels of what it said is more seasonal June activity, with the caveat that 8% sequential decline for flatbed was its largest in six years.

Looking at July contract rates, dry van and reefer set new records for sequential gains, at $3.01 per mile, up $0.12, and at $3.29, up $0.07, respectively, with flatbed, at $3.83 per mile, up $0.03, to $3.83 per mile, in July. When excluding fuel, DAT said that the average contract van linehaul rate rose $0.13, to $2.39 per mile, with reefer up $0.07, to $3.29 per mile, and flatbed up $0.04, to $3.09.  

DAT’s data highlighted the following takeaways for truckload volumes, and rates, for July:

• the national average spot van rate was up $0.01 sequentially and $0.96 annually, to $3.01 per mile;
• the national average spot reefer rate was up $0.03 sequentially and up $1.00 annually, to $3.42 per mile;
• the national average flatbed rate decreased $0.05 sequentially and rose $1.09 annually, to $3.64 per mile;
• national average contract linehaul rates were mixed, with van up $0.02, to $2.39 per mile, reefer up $0.05, to $2.75 per mile, and flatbed down $0.04, to $2.90 per mile, with annual gains, for the three segments, up $0.76, $0.79, and $0.86, respectively; and
• average fuel surcharges were down $0.01-to-$0.02, from June to July, coming in at $0.62 for van freight, $0.67 for reefer freight, and $0.74 for flatbed freight, with fuel surcharges down $0.20-to-$0.23 higher on an annual basis

DAT industry analyst Dean Croke said in a statement that spot rates coming in higher than contract rates have served as a historical indicator of a tightening market, while also pointing out that conditions have not seen a capacity-driven market environment like this current cycle.

“Van spot and contract rates reached parity in July even as volumes declined, while van and reefer rates posted record June-to-July gains,” he said. “When rates rise this quickly as volumes fall, it indicates that available capacity is exerting greater influence on pricing.”

In an interview with LM, Croke explained that, going back to the July 4 holiday, there has been some sequential “cooling off” of rates, which he described as a normal easing, following a “white hot” market.

“I think the story is that we are coming off of a much higher peak, which makes the rate fall-off from July look really high,” said Croke. “With rates, there is a demand pullback is coming from what was an outsized run up to July 4. There were many factors driving that: a tariff bump ahead of normal seasonality and a lot of pre-shipping going on, with demand pull-forward into West Coast ports and shippers worried about tariffs; and the continuation of capacity, or drivers, exiting the market much faster than expected. Which has caused this repricing that is going on.”

To that end, Croke said that there was an intersection of the July period of fairly robust demand around seasonal factors but there being far fewer trucks available to haul that demand, due to impact of various regulatory actions impacting capacity [myriad actions taken by the federal government focused on Commercial Driving Licenses (CDL), related to tightening requirements and English Language Proficiency, among others], which caused spot rates to shoot up.

As an example, Croke said flatbed was at more than $3.00 per mile, a record-high, but that has pulled back pretty quickly, with August, to date, seeing the steam largely go out of the market, calling that development an interesting shipper story, in that it could provide shippers with an impetus to reprice rates, below anticipated budget levels.

Looking ahead, Croke said that rates are likely to peak around any seasonal shock, citing the upcoming Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance’s Brake Safety Week 2026, which he said are guaranteed to see a rate spike, followed by Halloween and other seasonal events.

“I think you'll see rate volatility, and they'll hold the floor,” he said. “We'll see rates ease seasonally, but I think they're at this 35%-to 40% higher year-over-year floor, and that will be maintained,” he said. “Now, what drives up spot rates in the end is how quickly contract rates reprice, and they're coming in at 9%-to-11% higher than they were a year ago. Contracts are still repricing, but I think that panic that shippers were in leading up to July 4 has disappeared, as the spot market has cooled. I had a large shipper say to me, ‘carriers are coming in using spot rates as a base to renegotiate contract rates and telling this story about how rates are going to continue skyrocketing because capacity is exiting,’ and, of course, here we are halfway through August and rates have dropped 24 or 25 cents since there is no sense of a cooling in the market. That will slow down the rate of growth. There will still be growth, but I don’t think it will be as wild as what they were anticipating.”

In assessing how things could go from here, he also observed that is somewhat contingent on equipment type. Dry van will probably continue to hold, or head slightly down, he said, with reefer moving through its normal seasonal activity and cool off until the fall on a regional basis, noting that rates will likely move higher in the Pacific Northwest, as well as areas related to the fall produce season.

“That will not move the national needle, though,” he said. “It will still be fairly flat. I think flatbed is the one that will hold the firmest and have the most potential to keep climbing.”

According to FTR, a TCI reading above zero represents an adequate trucking environment, with readings above 10 indicating that volumes, prices and margin are in a good range for carriers.

And it explained that the TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market. These conditions include: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Individual metrics are combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health. A positive score represents good, optimistic conditions. And a negative score represents bad, pessimistic conditions. Readings near zero are consistent with a neutral operating environment, and double-digit readings in either direction suggest significant operating changes are likely.

For June, the most recent month for which data is available, the TCI reading came in at 17.4, which came in below May’s 20.4, an all-time high for the TCI—which was preceded by April’s 11.6.

The firm explained that June’s reading continued to reflect what it called a very favorable market for carriers, observing that slightly less robust freight rate growth was partially offset by lower diesel prices in June to produce overall market conditions that were not quite as positive as those in May, while also noting that the outlook for carriers is a bit stronger than it was in the prior forecast.

“We expect the market to be favorable for carriers throughout our two-year forecast horizon, but the recovery appears to be stabilizing,” said Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking. “For example, spot rates in July softened as seasonally expected even though fuel prices rose sharply – quite a different dynamic than what occurred in March. Even if spot rates have peaked, contract rates likely will continue to rise well into 2027. To this point, the truck freight market’s strength is principally due to supply-side constraints—especially for dry van and refrigerated operations. An encouraging signal is the ongoing recovery in manufacturing demand, and consumer spending has been solid. Data center construction clearly has boosted flatbed especially. Concerns include slowing U.S. job growth, a persistently weak housing sector, and stubborn price inflation for both consumers and businesses. Although freight demand still doesn’t look that strong, we see little sign that trucking capacity will rise substantially in the near term.”

That was the main thesis of the new edition of Prologis’s Industrial Business Indicator (IBI), which was released last week. 

Prologis defines the IBI as a survey of customer sentiment focused on customer activity in warehousing. 

The second quarter IBI Activity Index reading, at 59.3, reflects increased warehousing activity, remaining in the 55-to-60 range, with Prologis explaining that the reading represents several quarters of sustained demand improvement, indicating that the logistics real estate market has moved into what it called growth mode.

“U.S. net absorption reached a cyclical high after several quarters of outperformance of initial expectations,” it said. “This momentum is forecast to continue through the remainder of 2026 and bring vacancy down by approximately 30 bps for the year. The IBI Activity Index supports this momentum, having remained in the high 50s through the first half of 2026. Together, these indicators show that customers are becoming more confident making long-term supply chain and expansion decisions.”

Looking at some key metrics, the IBI Industrial Business Indicator noted the following:

• U.S. net absorption, at 66 million square-feet (SF), marking the highest quarterly level since 2022, with the IBI reading firmly in expansion territory for the first half of 2026;
• Prologis expects around 220 million SF of absorption in 2026 compared to 205 million SF of completions, with availability being particularly constrained for large, well-located facilities, where leasing activity is currently ahead of 2025 levels;
• U.S. rents rose 70 basis points sequentially, with the firm expecting vacancy to decline over the balance of 2026, with demand continuing to outpace new deliveries; and
• More diverse demand patterns, with e-commerce and essential goods remaining important drivers, while advanced manufacturing and companies supporting data centers, defense, and semiconductor supply chains generating new requirements, as companies build out supply chains for data center infrastructure, defense-related activity and more regionalized production—adding another layer of growth beyond what traditional e-commerce and essential goods demand

In an interview with LM, Melinda McLaughlin, Senior Vice President and Global Head of Research at Prologis, said that there are various factors driving net absorption to 66 million SF, adding that Prologis is seeing customers move forward with expansion, following 2025’s caution, as a diverse customer base supports sustained demand.

"We’re seeing a broader range of customers move forward with expansion," said McLaughlin. "E-commerce, third-party logistics and essential goods companies remain active, while advanced manufacturing, data center construction, defense-related activity and supply chain reconfiguration are creating new sources of growth. That diversification is making the recovery more durable."

When asked how occupiers approach the intersection of improving demand, increasingly limited supply and constrained availability for large, well-located facilities, McLaughlin said that occupiers need to plan earlier and move faster.

"As demand increases to 220 MSF forecast in 2026 and new unleased deliveries decline to a forecast 205 MSF in 2026, large, well-located facilities are becoming particularly hard to find," she said. "Waiting can increase both execution risk and cost exposure, so more customers are beginning site selection well before they need the space and considering built-to-suit options when existing facilities aren’t available.

As for how long logistics real estate will remain in growth mode, in addition to the pace of ongoing rent growth, McLaughlin said that Prologis believes the market has entered into a new stage of growth, with demand momentum expected to continue through the remainder of 2026.

“The market has entered a new expansion, with demand building as supply slows and availability tightens, with vacancy declining 30bps in 2026 and bulk space falling 60bs below the market level in Q2," she explained. "Timing will vary by market, but these conditions should support rent growth across an increasing number of U.S. markets. Structural demand drivers—including data center infrastructure, advanced manufacturing and e-commerce—give this expansion a long runway, although economic conditions will influence its duration and magnitude. At the same time, the gap between market rents and the cost of new construction is sizable: rents would need to rise by double digits in many locations to support broader development. That dynamic reinforces the need for occupiers to plan ahead." 

From an industry perspective, McLaughlin said she expects demand, for logistics real estate, to remain broader and more diversified—across different verticals—than it has been in recent years. 

"Momentum is building across e-commerce, essential goods, advanced manufacturing and digital infrastructure, making the recovery less dependent on any single industry," she said. 

This follows an April announcement, in which the White House issued a 90-day extension to the Jones Act waiver, which was initially put in place for 60 days on March 18.

The Jones Act is a law that regulates shipping between United States ports and requires that any cargo shipped between U.S. ports must be transported on ships that are: built in the U.S.; owned by U.S. citizens; flagged, or registered, in the U.S.; and mainly comprised of crewmembers that are U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

An Associated Press report said that this new extension will go into effect on August 17, adding that “suggests that the U.S. might be preparing for continued price pressures as the Strait of Hormuz, a primary waterway for shipping oil and natural gas, remains effectively closed because of the war.”

What’s more, the AP report explained that the Pentagon will consult with the Maritime Administration to decide which voyages are exempt from the 1920 law containing the Jones Act, which was not the case in previous extensions. It also said that this new waiver will only apply to cargo that are sources of energy and commodities related to agriculture such as fertilizers and soybean oil.

Going back to the week of February 24, prior to the beginning of the Iran conflict, through Monday, August 10, the average price per gallon of diesel gasoline has increased from $3.697 per gallon to $5.257 per gallon, or around 30%, according to data from the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA). And the average price per barrel of WTI Crude has increase from $64.51 to $84.81 over the same period, a 31.5% gain.

As previously reported, when the extension to the Jones Act waiver was initially introduced in March—soon after energy prices saw sharp spikes, spurred on by the joint strikes launched by the United States and Israel on Iran, in an initiative geared halting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons—the Department of Energy Secretary Chris Wright said that by temporarily waiving the Jones Act, President Trump is ensuring that oil and other energy resources flow to Americans across the country even during times of disruption.

“This will help to ease short-term price impacts in the oil market as we work every day to lower prices,” noted Wright at the time.

Feedback to initially waiving the Jones Act for 60 days was not well received by a coalition of U.S.-based maritime labor unions in March—including: American Maritime Officers; American Radio Association; International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots; Marine Firemen’s Union; Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association; Maritime Trades Department, AFL-CIO; Sailors’ Union of the Pacific; Seafarers International Union; and the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO—in a joint statement.

“America’s maritime labor unions are deeply concerned about the Administration’s broad Jones Act waiver, which undermines our national security, weakens military readiness, and hands critical maritime work to foreign vessel operators,” it noted. “Jones Act waivers are intended to meet a strict legal standard and are traditionally granted only in narrow, clearly defined national security emergencies where U.S.-flag capacity is unavailable. Maritime labor has supported narrowly tailored Jones Act waivers in the past when they were obviously justified in the national interest, but this sweeping action does not meet that standard.

This decision will not provide meaningful relief at the gas pump. It has been plainly shown that the primary driver of gasoline prices remains the global cost of crude oil, and multiple analyses demonstrate that domestic shipping accounts for less than one cent per gallon. Any marginal savings will not reach consumers but will instead reward foreign shipping interests at the expense of American workers. Maritime labor calls on the Administration to reverse course and work with stakeholders on real solutions that address energy costs without sacrificing American jobs, national security, or the long-term strength of the U.S. maritime industrial base.”

When the first Jones Act waiver was announced, Jock O’Connell, economist, at the Pacific Maritime Shipping Association, said, at the time, that the logistical and bureaucratic obstacles of waiving the Jones Act for 60 days are daunting.

“Ships would have to be found or redeployed from existing services, and crews would need to be hired,” he said. “The Coast Guard will want to inspect vessels and certify officers. Environment regulations will likely preclude the use of many older ships and barges. By the time ship owner would be able to rise to the bait, the 60-days would have elapsed.” 

For the week of August 10, the national average fell 9.1 cents to $5.257, following a 3.5-cent increase, to $5.348, for the week of August 3, and a 17.9-cent increase to $5.313, for the week of July 27. Prior to that, for the week of July 20, the national average price per gallon increased 33.8-cents, coming in at $5.134, marking the third-highest weekly increase on record (and matching the week of June 9, 2008), since EIA first began collecting this data.

This was preceded by a $1.058 increase to $4.796, for the week of July 13, which marked first weekly increase since a $0.001-cent decrease, to $5.639, for the week of May 11.

The national average price per gallon, for the week of July 6, fell 9 cents, coming in at $4.578 per gallon, following a 16.4-cent decrease, to $4.668, for the week of June 29, following a 22.7-cent decline, to $4.832, for the week of June 22, which snapped a 14-week stretch of the national average topping the $5.00 per gallon mark, going back to the week of March 16, when the national average was at $5.071 per gallon.

Prior to that, the national average, for the week of June 15, dropped 15.1 cents, to $5.059, following a 14.0-cent decline, to $5.210, for the week of June 8, a 17.3-cent decline, to $5.350, for the week of June 1, which marked steepest weekly decline since the week of April 20, when the national average fell 20.5 cents, from $5.608 to $5.403, for the largest weekly decline in more than three years, according to EIA data.

Before the week of May 4, the highest average price in any week since came during the week of May 9, 2022, when it was at $5.623 per gallon. Prices continue to remain elevated, due to the launched joint strikes by the United States and Israel, in an initiative geared towards halting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons.

On an annual basis, the national average price per gallon is up $1.503. The average price of WTI crude is at $82.95, up from $76.81 at week ago at this time.   

This free publication is issued monthly by the AAR and provides insights from AAR economists regarding what rail traffic is saying about the current state of the economy, as well as where things may be headed. It also features a Freight Rail Index (FRI), which AAR said “tracks movement across the most economically sensitive rail traffic commodities,” including U.S. carload commodities (excluding coal and grain) and intermodal containers and trailers.

AAR Chief Economist Rand Ghayad told LM that that the RIO essentially provides a summary of the key findings from the roughly 45 reports AAR produces for various industry stakeholders, with some of those reports geared toward those in the freight rail industry, as well as policymakers and academics, with data and information coming from what he called a wide range of sources.

“Rail volume or rail traffic data in general is usually seen as a very important and solid indicator of what's happening in the economy,” he said. “So, if you want to know how the economy is going to be moving over the next couple of months, one way is actually to look at what's happening in the rail industry. The whole idea of RIO is to summarize the findings from everything we're putting out there and connect the dots with what's happening in the economy. If the industry is doing well, it means the economy is on the right track. If the industry is not doing well, it means there are some concerns about how the economy is proceeding. It's meant to be very easy to digest. It's not meant to be very technical. It's not meant to be only for rail folks. It's meant to be for everybody who's interested in knowing about the economy, and mostly about how rail drives the economy.”

The July RFI increased for the fourth consecutive month and posted its second-highest level on record, at 118.2, with its strength pointing to continued momentum in goods movement and also providing a clear positive signal for near-term economic activity, the report stated.

July U.S. rail carloads, saw a 0.5%, or 6,176 carloads, increase, to 225,977, growing for the seventh consecutive month, with 14 of the 20 carload commodity groups tracked by AAR seeing annual gains. What’s more, the report explained that July represented the highest-volume or second-highest-volume in a month for nine of the 20 carload commodity groups, including nonmetallic minerals, lumber, paper, petroleum products, and steel products.

“Rail traffic is being driven by diverse sources of demand, not just by a few key sectors,” said AAR. “Whether that’s the result of stronger economic activity, market share gains from other modes, or other factors, strength is widespread across the rail network and likely to be more durable.

Total July intermodal volume, 286,647 containers and trailers, increased 6.1% annually, rising for the sixth straight month while setting a new July record, with year-to-date volume, at 6,811,496 units, up 2.7% annually.

“Year-to-date intermodal volume through July this year is a record-high,” said AAR. “It reflects a combination of excellent current rail service levels; higher trucking costs associated with higher diesel prices and fewer available drivers; and continued strong consumer demand for goods. Together, those factors have put 2026 on pace to be the best year in intermodal history.”

In collectively looking at U.S. July carload and intermodal volumes, AAR explained that July extended a pattern that has persisted throughout much of 2026: growth in most rail carload categories and exceptional intermodal volumes.

Quarterly operating revenue, at $19.9 billion, fell 6.1% annually, following a 2.3% annual fiscal second quarter gain. And its net loss under generally accepted accounting principles came in at $2.5 billion, down from $3.1 for the same quarter a year ago, while steeper than a $2.0 billion fiscal second quarter loss.

Operating revenue, at $19.9 million, headed up 6.1%, or $1.1 billion, annually, paced by what USPS described as ongoing growth in its USPS Ground Advantage Shipping and Packages subcategory and also gains in Marketing Mail. What’s more, it added that operating revenue gains were supplemented by First-Class Mail and Marketing Mail price hikes, as well as a transportation-related, time-limited price increase that took effect on April 26, for various Shipping and Packages category offerings, which it noted were partially offset by declining First-Class Mail and Shipping and Packages volume declines.

“Our results this quarter reflect some progress relative to those areas of the business where we can exercise control, namely with revenue generation, cost control and service improvement,” said Postmaster General David Steiner. “Nevertheless, the Postal Service is today continuing to face a severe liquidity crisis, and our financial losses this quarter reflect systemic challenges inherent in our Congressionally established business model and regulatory framework. We are taking responsible steps to conserve cash to extend our operating window, but we require thoughtful legislative and other actions to establish a financially sustainable Postal Service capable of serving the American public far into the future.”

As previously reported in March, the USPS has hired restructuring advisers to review its finances as leaders warn the agency could run out of money by 2027 if major changes are not made. The move comes as the Postal Service continues to struggle with falling mail volumes and rising costs across its nationwide delivery network. Officials say outside advisers will help evaluate financial options and long-term strategies for stabilizing the organization.

Steiner said, at the time, that the organization’s financial situation remains serious.

“We are out of cash in 12 months if we don’t do anything different,” he said.

But in late June the USPS said it is no longer on track to run out of cash next year after a series of financial moves pushed its projected cash shortfall back to at least 2031. But Steiner warned lawmakers this that the agency's long-term financial problems remain unresolved.

Steiner told members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that the Postal Service's latest projections now show it can continue operating until sometime between 2031 and 2034 without running out of cash. Just a few months ago, USPS had warned Congress that it could exhaust its cash reserves and be forced to halt mail delivery as early as February 2027.

The Postal Service has been dealing with financial challenges for years. Traditional first-class mail, once the backbone of the organization’s business model, has steadily declined as more communication moves online.

On April 9, 2026, USPS said that the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC), an independent Federal agency that provides transparency and accountability of all USPS operations, approved a Temporary Conditional Waiver that removes restrictions requiring the Postal Service to use funds generated through retirement-related rate authority solely for minimum pension amortization payments. And USPS added that it will decide later this year whether to use the authority granted under the waiver. Under PRC rules, the waiver permits these funds to be directed toward operating costs and capital investments, provided the waiver’s conditions are satisfied.

Although the Postal Service welcomes this temporary relief, it said it continues to encourage the PRC to focus on the organization’s long-term financial stability, as mandated by law, and to address its earlier request for regulatory reforms. These proposed changes include revising the Market Dominant ratemaking framework by eliminating the price cap and implementing a regulatory monitoring system to support a more sustainable financial model. If the price cap remains in place, the Postal Service believes the PRC should allow rates to be reset at levels that adequately cover costs while preserving adjustment mechanisms flexible enough to respond to changing external conditions.

USPS reported that Shipping and Packages revenue rose $588 million, or 7.7%, to $8.25 billion, with volume down 55 million pieces, or 3.4%, to 1.554 million. Marketing Mail revenue rose $440 million, or 12.3%, on a volume gain of 574 million pieces, or 4.3%. First-Class Mail revenue was up $255 million, or 4.3%, with volume off 343 million pieces, or 3.5% annually.

In its Form 10-Q statement USPS explained that its Shipping and Packages business is subject to intense competition, noting that in-sourcing from its major customers, major e-commerce retailers, and other competitors continues to grow.

“Our ability to remain competitive and maintain or grow our shipping services market share significantly impacts both revenue and volume,” it stated. “The results for our Shipping and Packages category for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2026 and 2025 generally reflect both our efforts and challenges to compete in shipping services, including "last-mile" ecommerce fulfillment markets and Sunday delivery, as well as end-to-end markets, driven by consumers' continued use of online shopping.”

The USPS Ground Advantage offering, which was rolled out in July 2023, saw revenues of $4.645 billion, for a 14.6% annual increase, with 785 million pieces delivered, for a 2.3% annual increase. This service is comprised of two-to five- day service standards for packages up to 70 pounds, and USPS is incorporating three services—USPS Retail Ground, Parcel Select Ground, and First-Class Package Service—into this Ground Advantage service.

USPS added in the Form 10-Q that it continues to face systemic imbalances that make its current operating model unsustainable.   

“As communicated in the Delivering for America plan, we are implementing strategic operational reforms to meet the changing needs of our business and residential customers,” it said. “While significant progress has been made to date, the overall success of the plan still requires complete implementation of numerous management initiatives, along with administrative and legislative reforms that are outside of our control. Shortfalls or delays in implementation of the plan will place additional pressure on our liquidity and financial results. As a result of these concerns, we do not have sufficient liquidity to meet all of our existing legal obligations when due while also repaying our maturing debt and making the critical infrastructure investments that have been deferred in recent years, and that are necessary to fulfill our primary mission, without putting our ability to fulfill that primary mission at undue risk.”  

This was also raised by USPS CFO Luke Grossman whom observed that the financial results for the quarter reflect a slight improvement compared to the same quarter last year, as USPS continues to grow revenue and manage the costs under its control, including reducing 4 million work hours during the quarter.

"However, management actions alone will not resolve ongoing financial problems that are caused by an outdated business model that isn’t responsive to change,” said Grossman. “We need to pair those helpful management actions with legislative, regulatory, and administrative reforms to get our organization on its way to financial sustainability."

As reported by LM, following a December announcement, in which it said shippers of all sizes would be able to access more than 18,000 of its delivery destination units (DDU), for entry into its last-mile network, through a solicitation process to start accepting bids, the USPS said last month that its bidding website to accept proposals is now up and running.

USPS said that while it has been selling delivery service directly from its DDUs for a number of years, it was typically geared towards what it called a limited number of very large customers. And it said that going forward customers will be able to suggest a combination of volume, pricing and tender times at each available DDU location for USPS delivery either the same day or the next day.

The ports surveyed in the report include: Los Angeles/Long Beach; Oakland; Tacoma; Seattle; Houston; New York/New Jersey; Hampton Roads; Charleston, and Savannah; Miami; Jacksonville; and Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based Port Everglades.

Authors of the report explained that cargo import numbers do not correlate directly with retail sales or employment because they count only the number of cargo containers brought into the country, not the value of the merchandise inside them, adding that the amount of merchandise imported provides a rough barometer of retailers’ expectations.

“We had an early peak season this year as retailers brought in merchandise ahead of tariff changes in late July and responded to other uncertainties in the supply chain like the ongoing disruption brought by the conflict in Iran,” NRF Vice President for Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jonathan Gold said. “One round of tariffs has been replaced with another, but retailers will be well stocked for the coming holiday season. Retailers know how to adapt to shifting situations and are well prepared to meet consumers’ demand for affordability and choice.”

For June, the most recent month for which data is available, U.S. imports, for the ports covered in the report, handled 2.22 million TEU (Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units), up 13.2% annually, as June 2027 saw declining imports related to the timing of the White House’s “Liberation Day,” and fell 0.7% sequentially. For the first half of 2026, the report said total imports, at 12.7 million TEU, were up 1.1% annually.

Port Tracker issued projections for July and the subsequent months, including:

• July, at 2.21 million TEU, down 7.6% annually;
• August, at 2.22 million TEU, down 4.2% annually (with the report noting that imports are expected to decline steadily each month over the balance of the year, with volumes expected to be above 2025 levels;
• September, at 2.16 million TEU, up 2.8% annually;
• October, at 2.13 million TEU, up 2.7% annually;
• November, at 2.03 million TEU, up 0.3% annually; and
• December, at 2.06 million TEU, up 2.5% annually

The report’s authors explained that the highest-volume month of 2026 was May, at 2.24 million TEU, adding that Peak Season, which typically comes on late summer or fall, is earlier and also smoother than in recent years, due to various factors, ranging from supply chain disruptions to expected tariff increases.

The report said that total 2026 volume is expected to come in at 25.5 million TEU, for a 0.1% annual gain.

“Looking at events globally, the month also seems short of definitive news that points to meaningful insights into economic growth,” Hackett Associates Founder Ben Hackett wrote in the report. “The US economy grew by 1.5% year-on-year in the second quarter, dragged down from 2.1% the quarter before in part due to the surge in imports driven by businesses front-loading shipments ahead of anticipated tariff increases. Even so, consumer spending has remained resilient despite persistent geopolitical uncertainty: total retail and food services sales in the second quarter were up 6.4% from the same period a year ago. Consumers might have been expected to become more cautious as cost-of-living pressures persist, with energy prices in particular at the forefront of the news. Crude oil prices continue to fluctuate as intermittent Iran ceasefire talks fail to stop attacks from either side or reopen the Strait of Hormuz.”

The shipper groups—The Alliance for Chemical Distribution (ACD), American Chemistry Council (ACC), The Fertilizer Institute (TFI), and the National Industrial Transportation Group—stated that UP and NS have not provided enough information regarding the merger and its impact to enable the STB to “find it meets the statutory public-interest standard,” or prima facie (accepted as correct until showing otherwise).

To that end, the shipper groups said that the prima facie is a preliminary screen that is based on the sufficiency of the evidence submitted by UP and NS in their application and supplemental filings, in the most favorable light.

In the filing with the STB, they explained that under the STB’s merger rules, which were revised in 2001.

“In 2001, the Board revised its merger rules, to reflect a fundamental shift that made future mergers harder to justify by placing a heavier burden on future merger applicants to demonstrate that their transactions meet the public interest standard,” the filing stated. “Among the more significant changes were a new focus on enhancing competition and assessing downstream and cumulative effects, the exclusion of benefits that could be obtained by alternative means, a more skeptical ‘show me’ attitude towards benefit claims, and transitional service disruption plans. The objective of the 2001 Merger Rules was to codify the Board’s concerns that any future mergers—with a particular focus on end-to-end transcontinental mergers—could have transformative, serious, and irremediable consequences for the rail industry, its consumers, and the North American Rail network.”

Nancy O’Liddy, Executive Director, National Industrial Transportation League, observed that despite the Board repeatedly asking for additional information and data, UP-NS has failed to transparently demonstrate how the combined railroads will enhance rail-to-rail competition and how the touted benefits of the merger will outweigh its harms.

“This proposed merger will cause grave competitive impacts that cannot be effectively remedied through the STB’s conditioning authority,” said O’Liddy. “All freight rail shippers, especially captive shippers, must benefit from guaranteed, long-term improved competitive service—not just empty promises. It is imperative that the Board deny this proposed merger application.”

As previously reported, the current status of the proposed merger remains pending before the STB and has yet to be approved, while it has advanced beyond the initial filing stage and is now in the regulatory review process, according to the STB.

On May 28, in a unanimous decision, the STB accepted the revised major merger application filed by UP and NS for consideration, in addition to a related application.

The STB said that this decision held the merger process in abeyance, or temporary suspension, including an environmental review of the transaction and ordered the railroads to submit supplemental information by no later than July 27.

On July 27, UP and NS took steps to enhance their merger application and submitted provided commitments to the STB that it said “go beyond those provided in any prior rail merger” and include supplemental information requested by the STB on May 28, when it accepted the merger application as complete.

The new, or expanded, commitments submitted by UP and NS include the following:

• New Competitive Opportunities. The combined railroad will significantly expand Committed Gateway Pricing (CGP), doubling the number of eligible shipments, and extending benefits to bulk unit train shippers. The expanded program is the functional equivalent of thousands of haulage agreements in a single enforceable commitment, creating even more opportunities for customers to benefit from the merger;
• Expanded Customer Protections. The railroads will preserve Class I rail options for 3-to-2 shippers as well as 2-to-1 shippers, where they can legally grant access to another railroad. No prior rail merger has included a similarly broad commitment to preserve 3-to-2 access;
• New Service Level Protections. In the unlikely event that service performance declines during merger integration, customers will be able to obtain temporary access to alternative rail service. This commitment provides an additional safeguard to help keep freight moving if unexpected service issues arise; and
• Stronger Oversight. If the merger’s public benefits are not being delivered in a timely manner, customers will gain access to a new rate relief process. Combined with the new integration period service protection, this new process provides added accountability to customers.

“We are more confident than ever that creating America’s first transcontinental railroad is good for America. The merger will provide our customers faster, more reliable and efficient coast-to-coast service from day one and create cost savings that will flow through to consumers,” said Union Pacific CEO Jim Vena. “We talk to our customers every day, and as we listened to them and reviewed the STB’s comments, we saw opportunities to provide additional assurances through an unprecedented set of voluntary commitments to our customers.”

And NS President and CEO Mark George said that the public benefits of this merger are clear, noting that that stronger supply chain makes American business more competitive.

“Shifting freight from road to rail reduces wear on taxpayer-funded roads, improves safety, relieves congestion and lowers emissions,” said George. “Reinvigorating the rail industry creates high-paying union jobs.”

Paul Tonsager, founder of IMS Advisory, recently told LM that securing support for the merger will depend on UP and NS demonstrating that it is the right move.

He said the issue is not only about combining resources to create shareholder value, but also about increasing competition and delivering customer benefits.

“The STB, which will ultimately decide on this, takes the process very seriously,” he said. “The three-month period between the initial rejection and now coincides with upcoming midterm elections, and depending on the outcome, the conversation could shift. I previously estimated a 60–40 chance of the merger being approved, but now I see it as closer to 50–50. Part of that has to do with the application itself. Speed is not everything here—delays can invite negative press and additional scrutiny. In that sense, they may be slightly behind the eight ball after having to resubmit.”

Presented during Thursday morning’s opening general session, the awards recognize organizations that have successfully translated technology investments into measurable business outcomes. Rather than simply celebrating innovation, the program gives attendees the opportunity to learn directly from the practitioners responsible for designing, implementing and scaling these transformational initiatives.

This year’s winners demonstrate two distinct but equally powerful approaches to supply chain transformation, showing how intelligent technologies can improve both enterprise decision-making and warehouse execution.

The 2026 NextGen Supply Chain Conference will be held October 21-23 at the W Nashville in downtown Nashville. The End User Awards will kick off the event on Thursday, Oct. 22.

All of the 2026 NextGen Supply Chain Conference awards, which include the End User, Solution Provider, Startup, Partnership in Execution, and Visionary, are sponsored by Zion Solutions Group.

Please click here to read the complete article. 

For Zhu, the promotion wasn’t simply the culmination of more than two decades at Schneider Electric. It was the product of a career deliberately built across nearly every major function inside the business—from sales and procurement to logistics, industrialization and research and development.

“I’ve [not] been in this role not very long, around five months,” Zhu told Supply Chain Management Review. “There’s been no honeymoon. There are many challenges, but many achievements as well.”

Now serving in the role of Senior Vice President, North America Supply Chain Officer, Zhu believes his broad career experiences are exactly what is setting him up for success in his new role.

Please click here to read the complete article. 

Rail carloads, at 233,171, fell 0.4% annually, trailing the week ending July 25, at 234,100, and topping the week ending July 18, at 226,883.

AAR reported that seven of the 10 carload commodity groups tracked by AAR saw annual gains: metallic ores and metals, up 2,006 carloads, to 24,050; farm products excl. grain, and food, up 890 carloads, to 17,426; and grain, up 865 carloads, to 22,509. The three sectors seeing declines were: coal, down 4,760 carloads, to 57,451; motor vehicles and parts, down 833 carloads, to 14,990; and chemicals, down 794 carloads, to 33,492.

Weekly intermodal containers and trailers, at 293,239, posted a 4.8% annual increase, topping the week ending July 25, at 293,062, and trailing the week ending July 18, at 297,017.

Through the first 30 weeks of 2026, AAR reported that U.S. rail carloads, at 6,811,496, are up 2.7% annually, and intermodal containers and trailers, at 8,418,215, are up 3.8% annually.

The letter was written by: Eleanor Keukura Roi, Chairman, Asian Shipowners Association; David Loosely, Secretary General and CEO, BIMCO; Bud Darr, President and CEO, Cruise Lines International Association; Sotiris Raptis, Secretary General, European Shipowners; Thomas A. Kazakos, Secretary General, International Chamber of Shipping; Kostas Gkonis, Director/Secretary General, INTERARGO; Tim Wilkins, Managing Director, INTERANKO; and Joe Kramek, President and CEO, World Shipping Council.

“The ability of merchant ships to navigate international waterways safely, predictably and without any unnecessary impediment is fundamental to resilient supply chains, economic stability, and energy security,” the letter said. “Introducing compulsory charges for transit or service fees that are a toll in all but name through the Strait of Hormuz would represent a significant departure from established international practice. Beyond the immediate financial implications for global trade, it would establish a precedent that could undermine the internationally recognized legal framework governing straits used for international navigation and transit passage. Once such a precedent is established, it becomes increasingly difficult to resist similar measures elsewhere, creating uncertainty for international shipping and global commerce.

Any additional costs on maritime transport inevitably flow through international supply chains. These consequences extend beyond shipping costs, contributing to higher energy prices, higher inflation, and higher economic uncertainty.”

A Reuters report noted that the proposed deal would allow Iran to intervene with any inbound traffic through the Strait of Hormuz with outbound traffic following a route between Iran and Oman, with exit clearance granted through Oman after notifying Iran. And a Wall Street Journal report observed that a key part of the deal addresses separate shipping lanes, with ships entering the Persian Gulf moving through a lane adjacent to or within Iranian-controlled waters, with vessels exiting the Persian Gulf using a route closer to Oman-based waters. Which it said would provide Iran with increased oversight of outbound traffic and Oman overseeing a majority of the outbound route.

As for the proposed fees, the Reuters report said Iran would charge “between 5% and 7% of the price of cargoes from ships using the strait,” citing a senior Iranian official,” with “Oman is discussing fees of around 3%, while Washington wants no fees at all.”

When the conflict began in late February, with joint strikes launched by the United States and Israel on Iran, in an initiative geared halting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons, various logistics- and supply chain-related issues were raised, including the likelihood of higher energy prices, which came to fruition, but are now seeing declines, as well as restricted shipping lanes in and around the Middle East, which was seen with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which, prior to the start of the conflict, handled about 20% of the world’s petroleum supply (roughly 20 to 21 million barrels per day) and about 20% of global liquefied natural gas (LNG).

The impact of the conflict, in terms of U.S.-bound imports departing from Strait of Hormuz-affected ports has been significant, with data from Descartes showing that total U.S.-bound imports fell from 1.5M metric tons in May 2025 to 100,591 metric tons in May 20926, for a 93.2% annual decline.

From small package specialists to large, 80,000-pound full truckload operations, trucking executives say they are well-positioned to gain when the U.S. economy recovers from the Iran war and other economic detriments.

Of course, the announcement from Washington that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew by an anemic 1.5% annual rate in the second quarter put a damper on overall enthusiasm, even as individual carriers were posting impressive gains.

On the small package front, UPS is expecting record revenue this year of about $92 billion after shedding what executives described as sub-par freight when it cut back sharply on Amazon deliveries.

“Our second-quarter results marked an expected and significant shift in our performance,” CEO Carol Tomé said. UPS had planned to finish removing more than half of its Amazon freight from its network by mid-year. Specifically, UPS said it has eliminated approximately 2 million pieces per-day of lower-quality Amazon volume from its network.

In place of the low-margin e-commerce packages that Tomé described as “dilutive” to profits, UPS is focusing on fewer parcels that yield higher margins in a less-is-more strategy.

Amazon Shipping, the e-commerce giant’s delivery service, is growing market share by offering lower shipping rates than UPS and FedEx. However, Tomé said she is “not aware of any volume that we’ve lost to that competitor,” referring to Amazon on an analysts’ call.

Amazon’s strengths are delivering lightweight, short-distance shipments in urban areas, Tomé said.

“Where we have strengths is every other place,” Tome said.   

Less-than-truckload (LTL) market leader Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL) posted a 10.4% increase in revenue, a 30% rise in operating income and earnings per diluted share that match a company record set in third quarter 2022.

It all resulted in a stunning operating ratio of 70.1 for ODFL.

ODFL Chief Financial Officer Adam Satterfield said the freight recovery is still developing. "I think we are still in the early innings," he said on an earnings call. 

Satterfield said ODFL is benefiting from some freight shifting from competitors facing capacity issues. Freeman also said the company has the capacity to grow without running into bottlenecks.

“We’re not having any capacity issues, whether it be with equipment or drivers or real estate,” he said.

ABF Freight System, the seventh-largest LTL carrier and largest unit of ArcBest Corp., also beat analysts’ expectations as it “is outperforming seasonality,” according to Jason Seidl, trucking analyst for TD Cowen, in a note to investors.

Third-quarter freight is driven by “favorable weight/shipment trends” at ABF. But company officials tamped down commentary as they called U.S. industrial demand “subdued” in an analysts’ call.

J.B. Hunt’s second quarter truckload revenue was up 35% to $240 million in the period. But Hunt posted an operating loss of $1.3 million compared to operating income of $3.4 million for the second quarter ended June 30 .

That operating performance declined from the prior year period primarily due to higher purchased transportation expense, which resulted in a 12% decline in gross profit.

Hunt’s intermodal services accounted for nearly half its overall revenue of $1.44 billion in the quarter. Dedicated contract services accounted for another $847 million revenue, the company said.

Hunt executives said it knows shippers need to reduce costs. But at the same time they are demanding on-time service through their increasingly complex supply chains.

Landstar, the nation’s seventh-largest TL carrier with $2.3 billion revenue last year, also posted solid second quarter results as its management said it is benefitting from the strongest trucking market in four years.

Analyst Seidl said Landstar’s “core business trends are robust” as Landstar is benefiting from what Seidl called “early cycle inflection tailwinds.”

Landstar’s third quarter was off to a strong start with both volume and yield trends outperforming seasonality with some help from the 4th of July holiday. Its count of owner-operators ticked up sequentially and Landstar executives expected enthusiasm in the base to continue given a strong operating environment.

TFI International, the Canadian-based owner of the former U.S.-based Contract Freighter Inc. in truckload and the former Overnite unit in LTL, also surprised analysts with a strong second quarter.

TFII reported Q2 well above consensus estimates as TL strength was driven by yield growth and margin expansion, according to analyst Jason Seidl of TD Cowen.

Not only that, but third-quarter guidance is trending above previous estimates though margins should stay stable sequentially for both TL and LTL. TFII looks to “recover pricing in the near-term,” reflecting strength in both trucking markets.

FTR reported that preliminary July Class 8 orders, at 22,000 units, fell 31% sequentially, while posting a 75% annual gain, snapping a four-month stretch of orders topping 120% annual growth. On a year-to-date basis through July, orders are up 120% annually, said the firm. And it added that orders for the current season, from September 2025 through July 2026, are up 39% annually, and over the past 12 months through July, orders came in at 344,823 units.

FTR pointed to various drivers for the annual gains in July: replacement demand, firmer freight rates, improving utilization, and a moderate pre-buy to avoid new emissions charges continuing to support the market. It also noted that most calendar year 2026 truck production is already committed, with manufacturers have yet to open up 2027 order boards, leaving build spots constrained.

“With calendar 2026 production essentially sold out, attention shifts to decisions on model year 2027 engine technology, pricing, and build timing,” said Dan Moyer, senior analyst, commercial vehicles, at FTR. “Almost all model year 2027 engines are expected to carry manufacturer upcharges tied to compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2027 NOx regulation. However, EPA’s proposed revisions to the 2027 NOx rule, published on July 14, introduce considerable flexibility for truck and engine manufacturers to address fleet demand. For example, under EPA’s planned changes, manufacturers could continue building current-technology engines beyond 2026 indefinitely, subject to the payment of nonconformance penalties (NCPs), which presumably will be passed along to truck buyers. Several engine manufacturers have already announced plans to use NCPs to offer both current and new platforms well into 2027, and others are considering doing so.

Overall, July’s preliminary order volume suggests that Class 8 demand remains healthy as activity normalizes from unusually strong winter and spring levels. The next phase of the cycle will depend more on production-related factors than on overall demand, including whether EPA’s proposed flexibility delivers a smoother transition and a longer, shallower post-pre-buy decline in the market.”

ACT data: ACT reported that July preliminary Class 8 orders, at 22,100 units, saw a 68% annual gain and a 30% sequential decline.

“Class 8 preliminary orders in July totaled 22,100 units, up 68% y/y on easy comps and improved trucking fundamentals, but down 30% m/m on a seasonally adjusted basis,” said Carter Vieth, Research Analyst at ACT Research. “The sizable m/m decline doesn’t reflect a sudden drop in demand for new equipment but indicates a lack of 2026 build slots available as orders run up against full Class 8 backlogs, something we flagged as a possibility earlier this year. Lack of EPA clarity, at least until the end of August, may also be impacting orders, as OEMs and customers both await finality regarding regulations/penalties/pricing before 2027 order boards open.”

This report, which was initially launched in the third quarter of 2017, is comprised of data on freight shipping volumes and spending on both a national and regional basis. The report’s data is based on the actual transaction payment date and the highest-volume domestic freight modes of truckload and less-than-truckload, and is seasonally and calendar adjusted. Its historical data goes back to 2010, with a base point of 100, and its index point for each subsequent quarter marks that quarter’s volume in relation to the preceding quarter. U.S. Bank Freight Payment's business processes more than $43 billion in annual freight payments for some of the world’s largest corporations and government agencies.

The report’s second quarter shipment index value, at 75.1, was off 1.1% compared to the first quarter, and was down 2.8% annually, following the first quarter’s 0.6% annual gain, for its first annual gain in four years.

“Shipments remain soft because the broader freight economy remains soft,” the report stated. “Federal Reserve factory output data for the first two months of the quarter suggested slightly more manufacturing freight, but the gain was narrow. Total factory output averaged 1.1% above first-quarter levels. Excluding aerospace, miscellaneous transportation equipment, and computer and electronic products, growth was 0.7%. Year to date, total production was up 1.1% from 2025, but was flat when those stronger categories were excluded. Carriers not serving those sectors likely saw limited manufacturing freight growth.”

On a regional basis, shipments saw a 0.5% sequential increase and a 5.5% annual gain in the Western U.S.; a 3.7% sequential decline and a 2.8% annual gain in the Midwest; a 0.0% sequential reading and a 2.0% annual decrease in the Northeast; a 0.6% sequential decrease and a 20.2% annual decrease in the Southwest; and a 0.9% sequential increase and a 6.5% annual decline in the Southeast. The report explained that these readings reflect uneven freight demand across the country.

As for spending, the second quarter spend index value, at 75.1, fell 1.1% compared to the first quarter and was up 28.1% annually, while remaining 17% below the second quarter 2022 peak, with much of the gains paced by fuel, at $0.75 per mile, based on data from DAT, topping the first quarter by $0.24 and up almost 80% annually.

“Higher fuel surcharges added to shipper costs during the quarter, but fuel was not the only factor,” according to the report. “In many markets, limited capacity appears to have been the larger factor. One favorable development for shippers was the late-quarter decline in diesel prices. After peaking above $5.64 per gallon in April, the national average diesel price ended the quarter nearly a dollar lower at $4.67 per gallon.”

Spend data largely showed gains across the board, with the West, up 12% sequentially and 35.9% annually; the Southwest, up 11.2% sequentially and 39.9% annually; the Midwest, down 0.8% sequentially and up 22.9% annually; the Northeast, up 5.0% sequentially and up 26.5% annually; and the Southeast, up 10.0% sequentially and up 23.7% annually.

“The Southwest continued to stand out this quarter,” said Bobby Holland, director of freight business analytics at U.S. Bank. “The gap between declining shipments and rising spending was more pronounced there than anywhere else in the country. It's a signal that capacity conditions can have a significant impact on freight costs even when underlying demand isn't growing.”

That sentiment was echoed by Bob Costello, American Trucking Associations Chief Economist and the report’s lead author, whom wrote in the report that capacity tightened during the second quarter as the national spending index significantly outperformed the shipments index.

“The market continued trends seen in Q1 with capacity tightening, which appears to reflect two forces,” said Costello. “First, after three-plus years of freight recession, small, mid-sized and large fleets continued to exit amid weak rates, rising costs and softer volumes. That gradual reduction did not fully align supply with low demand, but it narrowed the gap. Second, industry participants have pointed to federal safety and compliance initiatives that gained momentum over the past year, including English language provisions (ELP), non-domiciled CDL (Commercial Driver’s License) revocations and increased oversight of driver training schools. These actions may have helped bring supply closer to demand and, in some markets, pushed available capacity lower.”

Costello added that diesel prices also increased shipper outlays, with tighter capacity appearing to have been the larger contributor, explaining that tighter capacity appears to have been the larger contributor.

To that end, he said that carriers seeing more freight may be benefitting from fewer fleets pursuing available loads, and not due to a broad-based demand recovery.

The July Services PMI reading, at 54.1 (a reading above 50 represents expansion and below 50 indicates contraction), was up 0.1% compared to June, growing, at a faster rate for the 25^th consecutive month, with the overall economy growing, at a faster rate, for the 74th consecutive month.

The July reading is 0.7% above the 12-month average of 53.4, with February’s 56.1 and September 2025’s 50.3 marking the respective high and low readings over that span.

ISM reported that 13 of the services sectors it tracks grew in July: Retail Trade; Transportation & Warehousing; Wholesale Trade; Management of Companies & Support Services; Information; Construction; Accommodation & Food Services; Public Administration; Utilities; Educational Services; Mining; Professional, Scientific & Technical Services; and Finance & Insurance. The four sectors reporting contraction in July were: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting; Other Services; Health Care & Social Assistance; and Real Estate, Rental & Leasing.

The report’s subindexes that factor into the PMI were mixed:

• Business Activity/Production, at 59.1, up 3.7%, growing, at a faster rate, for the 25th consecutive month, with 13 sectors seeing gains;
• New Orders, at 57.2, increased 2.1%, growing, at a slower rate, for the 14^th consecutive month and expanding in 41 of the last 43 months, with 13 sectors reporting increases in new orders;
• Employment, at 47.4, fell 3.8% after a 3.3% June gain, contracting for the fourth time in the last five months, with seven sectors reporting employment gains; and
• Supplier Deliveries, at 52.8 (a reading above 50 indicates contraction), were down 1.6%, slowing, at a slower rate, for the 20th consecutive month

Comments from ISM member panelists included in the report highlighted various trends in the services sector, with business conditions, tariffs, and prices receiving a fair amount of attention.

“Conditions are largely unchanged from last month,” said a Transportation & Warehousing panelist. “The exception is pricing, which continues to rise, driven mainly by fuel and labor costs. Demand remains stable.

A Wholesale Trade panelist said that business is more robust than expected, considering some of the economic headwinds still plaguing the industry.

“Lumber supply is tighter, and freight rates and availability are challenges,” said the panelist. “Many of our builders are pushing back hard on price increases. However, the outlook is favorable for the remainder of 2026.”

In an interview with LM, Steve Miller, Chair of the ISM Services Business Survey Committee, said that, in looking at Services PMI readings over the last few months, the underlying theme is that that are in similar territory and are solid, adding that the last stretch of similar Service PMI readings came in 2002, when the economy was coming out of the pandemic.

“The numbers are really good,” he said. For Employment, if you look at it in context with Backlog of Orders [down 4.0% to 50.9, growing for six straight months], I can see some relationship there. If you are able to keep up with backlog and the order volume with the people you have, then you don’t hire. It was about an eight-point shift from when you look at the overall numbers, from those in expansion versus those that are in contraction—which is not a huge shift but it is a significant shift. Will we see that with New Orders volume being as high as it is now? It has been more than four months of an increasing 12-month average for New Orders.”

July’s New Orders reading, at 57.2, marked the fourth-highest in the last 26 months, which Miller said leads to the question of if that is going to build up order backlog or if there are things going on in terms of productivity, in terms of things like AI development.”

As for headwinds within the services sector, Miller pointed to pricing for petroleum related products [May Prices in the report were up 2.6% to 70.3, increasing for the 110^th consecutive month].

“We are seeing that more broadly in the commentary, as well as on a repeat basis, for commodities up in price,” said Miller. “And we are still $20 a barrel above where we were in January…it is a higher cost of doing business.”

For the over-the-road market, rates and pricing have seen strong gains for a few months now. In more normal times, when the market was in more of what could be called a traditional cadence, the reasoning behind the strong pricing and rate gains would likely have been attributed to improving volumes and a truly resilient economy—in other words, improving demand. But as we have seen, that is not necessarily the case, at least not uniformly anyhow.

A primary reason for the improvements, of course, has been the myriad actions taken by the federal government focused on Commercial Driving Licenses (CDL), related to tightening requirements and English Language Proficiency, among others, which has lowered the amount of over-the-road capacity and subsequently improved the outlook for motor carriers, in what is largely being viewed as a supply-driven event.

That shift from a shippers’ market to a carriers’ market was a long time coming, no question. So, again, does that mean everything is back to normal and that the industry’s problems are solved? The short answer, despite the optimism, largely remains, no, not yet, anyhow.

But should demand meaningfully return, what happens then? That is a question for which, at least at the moment, there does not appear to be a clearcut answer.

One industry observer explained that remains to be seen, as it is contingent on how much, or, to what extent, that happens.

“Things are still largely dormant,” the observer noted. “Maybe the answer is just that things get a little better, but I don’t think it is going to be robust like some people think it is. I don’t see a catalyst for that. It could be that it is more of a demand-light cycle and a capacity cycle.”

And he added that is not to imply that there is no demand period, as the ongoing AI data center buildouts continue to contribute to volume and tonnage levels, with the caveat that it is not going to be recurring for a materially long period. What’s more, while consumers continue to spend, it is not at an incredibly high level, with many forced to tighten their belts, due to things like inflation and high gas prices. Adding to that, high mortgage rates are continuing to slow home sales, which does not help fill trucks and boost volumes.

Paul Tonsager, CEO, at IMS Advisory, observed that the CDL actions, as well as rising insurance, and immigration-focused efforts, among others, are collectively driving people out of the market.

What’s more, there is no silver bullet out there that can definitively point to how the market may look down the road, which Tonsager described as very concerning.

Matt Muenster, Chief Economist, at Breakthrough, was on the same page as Tonsager, explaining that supply challenges are kind of the experience of the market right now.

“When I think about what's driving price uniquely, maybe with the exception of flatbed, we don't have a lot of demand, or at least consistent demand across industries, to really be moving the needle,” he said. “Instead, it's really the supply side tightness, the availability of drivers, and a changing regulatory environment that's removed some drivers from the market.”

A bright spot amid the uncertainty is coming into focus on the manufacturing side, as evidenced by strong year-to-date readings from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM), with the manufacturing PMI, its core metric topping the 50-mark, its benchmark for growth each month, after a lengthy stretch of contraction.

“This is extremely important for trucking, because except for short-haul freight that typically moves in dump trucks, manufacturing can really be viewed as the driver in trucking, more so than consumer spending or housing,” said Avery Vise, Vice President of trucking, at FTR.

Vise makes a great point, but that should not be interpreted as things are back to normal, not yet. There are some positive signs out there but more work needs to be done, as the industry navigates its many challenges on a true road to recovery.