Globalization, technological innovation, and supply chain efficiency explain the current resilience of U.S. corporate profits—one of the few drivers of the U.S. economy at the moment.
Globalization, technological innovation, and supply chain efficiency explain the current resilience of U.S. corporate profits—one of the few drivers of the U.S. economy at the moment. The U.S. Department of Commerce recently reported that corporate profits (which includes both domestic and foreign profits) now make up the largest percentage of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) since the 1950s. This ratio currently stands at just under 13 percent of GDP, amounting to a total of US $1.9 trillion (see Figure 1). However, wage and salary disbursements have been slowly trending downward from 47 percent of GDP in 1985 to 44.4 percent in the second quarter of 2011 (see Figure 2). These trends seem to point to increased inequality between workers and managers, driven to some extent by the outsourcing of lower-skilled jobs to Asia.
U.S. domestic corporate profits—defined as American corporations' profits generated from operations in the United States—trended downward from the 1950s through the mid-1980s. But then that trend reversed, with profits experiencing wild swings during recession cycles. In the 1960s, domestic corporate profits were slightly less than 11.0 percent of GDP, falling to 7 percent by 1985.
Article Figures
[Figure 1] Corporate profits as percentage of U.S. GDPEnlarge this image
[Figure 2] Wage and salary disbursements as percentage of U.S. GDPEnlarge this image
Currently, domestic corporate profits stand at 10.1 percent of GDP. Analysts have been amazed at the rate at which domestic corporate profits have been able to spring back following the "Great Recession" (December 2007 to June 2009). Indeed, domestic corporate profits as a percentage of GDP fell to their lowest point in over 60 years during the recession and then rebounded to their pre-recession levels in just over one year. One reason why is that greater supply chain efficiency is allowing domestic companies to maintain lower inventories and avoid overshooting (accumulating inventory) when a slowdown occurs. This helps corporate profits to snap back more quickly. Inventory-tosales ratios adjusted for inflation have been trending down for the retail and wholesale trade over the past 15 years.
The innovation of business-to-business e-commerce has also changed the cost and profit picture for many companies. In 2003, approximately 21 percent of U.S. manufacturing sales and 14.6 percent of wholesale sales were e-commerce-related. By 2008 those percentages had increased to almost 40 percent for manufacturing and 16.3 percent for wholesale trade.
A major game changer in the last couple of decades has been the increasing influence of foreign profits—the profits U.S. corporations earn from overseas receipts. In the mid-1960s, U.S. corporations were making approximately 6.5 percent of their profits from foreign operations, which translated to less than 1 percent of GDP. By the mid-1990s, foreign profits started playing a stronger role in overall corporate profitability. Foreign profits are now slightly less than 4.3 percent of GDP—up more than four-fold from the mid-1980s—and American corporations now make 30 percent of their profits from foreign sources.
Comparative advantage comes into play
One of the central concepts behind the idea of "comparative advantage" advanced by British economist David Ricardo (1772-1823) is that countries specialize in what they do best (that is, most efficiently and cost-effectively), and trade is the central mechanism for exchanging those goods and services. Thus, globalization, trade liberalization, and free trade benefit all nations. Domestic and foreign profits benefit from increased globalization in different ways, and today technological and supply chain innovations are making world trade more profitable in ways David Ricardo could not have imagined.
U.S. and European companies have discovered the advantages of outsourcing low value-added production and service operations to countries with an abundance of productive yet low-wage laborers. Call centers in India and assembly plants in China are just two of many examples. (Approximately 60 percent of Chinese exports, in fact, are sanctioned by U.S. and European corporations.) Outsourcing enables companies to retain the more skilled and higher value-added distribution, design, and technical production processes in their home countries while importing services and goods with lower valued-added components. By doing so, they are optimizing their production cycles and minimizing their costs, thereby improving margins.
As emerging countries continue to develop, demand for high value-added exports from the United States and Europe is growing. Oddly, 30 percent of current U.S. exports are services. This is in addition to domestic corporate profits and makes them more resilient in times of domestic recession. There is considerable anecdotal evidence suggesting that service exports have higher margins than goods and material exports because there are no inventories to worry about and transportation costs (if any) are lower.
Foreign corporate profits have been a blessing for U.S. companies, since the global slowdown in 2008 through 2009 in China, Brazil, and India was relatively mild while U.S. and Western European economies were still dragging. Increasing consumer spending in foreign markets, especially Asia, continue to play a major role in improving U.S. corporate profitability by helping to prop up profits when U.S. domestic consumer spending is anemic.
Protect your profitability
Early in her political career, the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher often said that "there is no alternative" to trade liberalization, free trade, and globalization. That appears to be true for U.S. corporations, whose performance is becoming increasingly dependent on overseas operations to bring higher and more stable profits. However, the rising productivity of many Chinese and Indian industries is placing considerable wage and price pressure on U.S. companies' outsourcing operations. Many countries want to move up the value-added chain. In addition, the extensive, very specialized production concentrations that have developed due to some countries' comparative advantage have created considerable supply chain risks from such factors as natural disasters or political instability. Companies might want to think about building a few redundancies in their supply chain networks in order to hedge against events that may be improbable, yet if they happen—and unfortunately they do, as we saw in Japan earlier this year—can make the difference between profit and loss.
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.