What a difference a year makes. In 2014, the U.S. domestic for-hire trucking industry experienced a bounce-back after several years of contraction. Total tons and ton-miles reached the highest level in years, rates were on an upward slope by the end of that year, and, according to the American Trucking Associations, trucking revenue grew to over $700 billion for the first time ever. But just one year later, rates, tonnage, and revenue were stagnating, and the outlook was—and still is—trending toward slow growth in freight movements.
IHS Markit, a global provider of business information, analytics, and solutions, expects total U.S. domestic for-hire truck tonnage will see low year-over-year growth rates over the medium and long term. The proprietary IHS Transportation Transearch database of U.S. commodity movements shows that after a solid 2014, for-hire truck tonnage grew at a rate of just over 1 percent in 2015, to a total of roughly 4.4 billion tons handled by truckload carriers and 110 million tons by less-than-truckload (LTL) carriers. By the end of 2016, total tonnage for both truckload and LTL carriers is expected to be up only slightly—less than 1 percent each—from the 2015 year-end totals.
Truck tonnage should recover slightly in 2017 and 2018. Over the next decade, truckload tonnage is expected to increase at an average annual rate of 1.9 percent, while less-than-truckload tonnage will grow at a 2.5 percent rate. (See Figure 1.) Even with higher growth rates, total LTL tonnage is not expected to exceed 3.0 percent of the total for-hire domestic tonnage during the forecast period.
Why the slowdown?
The slow growth in truck tonnage doesn't seem to be due to any shift to other transportation modes. In fact, any move from truck toward rail intermodal should not impact the total tonnage on the road, as the typical container shipped on the rails has a corresponding truck drayage movement on both the origination and termination sides. Nor are we seeing private fleets taking business away from for-hire carriers. Private fleets are expected to see the same tonnage softness as for-hire trucking, and companies with private fleets increasingly are considering outsourcing their moves to dedicated, for-hire carriers as a cost-cutting measure. Additionally, rail carload and inland barge tonnage are both down. While these are not traditionally competitors for truck tonnage, this decline is another indicator that the slowdown is systemwide and is not limited to any particular mode.
Limitations on the availability of drivers do not seem to be causing the slow growth, either. While the industry continues to experience a shortage of qualified drivers, it's also true that trucking companies are looking to reduce excess capacity rather than expand their hiring. One indication of that trend is a sharp decline in orders for heavy-duty Class 8 tractors, down by one-third year-over-year as of June 2016.
Instead, the overarching reason for slow growth in truck tonnage is weak economic growth in the short term. In other words, the cargo is not there to be moved in the first place. Even the few bright spots in the economy may not offer much hope for a trucking recovery in the near term. The most recent data from the U.S. Department of Commerce shows housing construction rebounding from recession levels, particularly in the West and Northeast. Spending on highway and road construction has also been rising every year since 2011, to an estimated $1.07 billion in 2015, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
While this is certainly good news for the U.S. economy as a whole, the impact on the trucking sector is somewhat circumscribed. For one thing, the effects tend to be more regional; shipments in the construction industries often are associated with a shorter length of haul and therefore have a smaller revenue impact. For another, many of the primary commodities used in those industries—particularly aggregates, steel, lumber, and other building materials—are more likely to be transported by specialty haulers, so the gains are limited to a subsector of the for-hire trucking industry. Due in part to these factors, it is likely that the growth of freight movements will lag behind the growth in U.S. total gross domestic product (GDP).
The road ahead
Shippers have already been experiencing the impact of slow freight growth in the form of lower rates. In May, the Cass Truckload Linehaul Index, which measures per-mile truckload rates, showed three consecutive months of decline and fell to its lowest level since the summer of 2014.
IHS Transportation expects trucking prices to start heading upward in the second half of this year, assuming carriers are able to constrict supply enough to support higher rates. Other potential factors behind rate increases include higher costs for trucking companies in the form of higher wages and fuel prices. Due to the soft market, costs are currently out of synch with rates, and carriers are anxious to pass those higher costs along to customers as soon as the market allows. The industry's extremely high turnover—over 100 percent—and a period of wage stagnation in recent quarters could lead to driver wage increases. Additionally, average highway diesel prices started the year at $2.00 per gallon, but by the end of 2016 could be over $2.50 per gallon, echoing crude oil prices, which at this writing have bounced from their bottom of around $30 a barrel to more than $50 a barrel.
The expectation is for slow growth to continue. With energy prices low and employment gradually improving, U.S. consumers may be inclined to spend more of their paychecks, driving up demand for retail goods and therefore demand for transportation services. But there are a number of risks to consider. Unanticipated economic, political, or security shocks could upset the economic recovery. Another recession could mean a decline in freight movements; it could also lead to higher freight costs as smaller carriers go bankrupt and capacity shrinks further. Federal regulations, particularly upcoming greenhouse gas emissions standards and potential changes to hours-of-service restrictions, could also impact the trucking industry by reducing capacity and further slowing growth. And finally, what happens abroad has a direct impact on U.S. domestic trucking: a slowdown in the global economy or a revisiting of trade agreements may result in fewer goods and materials being transported to and from U.S ports of entry. With so many risk factors in play, buyers of trucking services will need to be vigilant if they're to anticipate how rates and capacity will play out in the coming year.
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain.”
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.