Month: February 2025

Characteristics of pre-tariff demand

January consumption expenditures ticked-down just a tad (see first chart below). Given unusually cold weather and perhaps some post-holiday restraint, this is not unprecedented nor necessarily the start of a pattern. January 2024 expenditures ($15,812.6 billion 2017 dollars) were lower than December 2023, but by last month US personal consumption expenditures had grown to $16,283.6 billion 2017 dollars).

The December 2024 to January 2025 decline in consumption expenditures was led by a 40-plus-percent drop in auto sales. December is almost always strong for auto sales and January is almost always weak. Looking under the auto industry’s hood suggests mixed results for January 2025. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis in January US consumers spent a little less on goods and a little more on services. This included 4.6 percent less on food and beverages, 11.6 percent more on gasoline (here and here) and other energy goods, and 13 percent more on eating out and travel accommodations.

I like to track Food At Home (FAH) consumption expenditures. Pre-pandemic I perceived shifts in real — inflation adjusted — PCE for food to be meaningful indicators of consumer distress or delight. Post-pandemic I have mostly been amazed at the step-wise increase in how much more food Americans consume (see second chart below). These sort of grocery store sales suggest to me a substantial slice of US consumers are not looking for deep cuts on discretionary expenses.

Delighted, distressed, or desperate these consumption patterns should be helpful to watch if and when more rigorous tariffs are imposed. A ten percent increase on imports from China was put in place in early February, a second ten percent has been promised. Late January tariffs of 25 percent on many (not all) goods from Mexico and Canada were suspended for negotiations. The negotiation period is scheduled to conclude on March 4. Steel and aluminum tariffs are scheduled to be implemented on March 4. Studies are underway to set reciprocal tariffs. Other tariffs have been discussed.

Tariffs add costs and sometimes delays. Increased costs usually increase consumer prices. Depending on the size and timing of tariffs — and the accessibility and price of replacement products — tariffs will often influence consumer behavior. High volume, high velocity supply chains tend to depend on persistent demand and supply capacity specifically organized around persistent demand. Sudden shifts in demand can be disruptive. The scope and scale of disruption depends on the depth and duration of the demand shift, as demonstrated by both of the charts below for several months following February 2020.

Tariffs (again)

From Sunday night to Monday noon (US Eastern Time) my inbox overflowed with questions and venting — probably more venting than questions. By Monday dinner-time the drama had significantly abated (here and here and here).

Back on December 2, I wrote in regard to Mr. Trump’s tariff strategies, “What is promised — threatened — often morphs to close a deal. So, any speculation by me regarding future tariff impacts on Supply Chain Resilience would be mostly noise. Anticipating the strategic threat certainly reinforces principles of capacity diversification and avoiding excess capacity concentration. This is true whether the threat is tariffs, typhoons, or terrorism…” That’s still my story and I’m sticking to it.

But to hold myself accountable for what is certainly further drama ahead. Here are excerpts from a Monday exchange with a financial journalist. I responded to his request for comments and connections just before 10AM Eastern Time.

The supply chain is also all-hands-on-deck.  Everyone is trying to figure it out.  Right now I perceive that most of my contacts are moving into the five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.  Some continue to deny (“just a bargaining chip…”).  I am hearing lots of anger (“dumb, absurd, counter-productive, self-destructive…”).  Lots of emails and phone calls starting to try to probe, clarify, and bargain.  Sometimes depression and anger are tough for me to distinguish.  No one I know has reached acceptance yet.  Just starting a meeting that will take much of this morning.  Back at you later.  Happy to respond to specific questions.

I then disappeared into a two hour-plus session with principals and lawyers involved in spinning-off a small, new company from a long-time player. Tariffs were not mentioned at all during this process.

Emerging from the successful spin-off, I reviewed emails received over that time, returned a couple of phone calls, then sent this follow-up to the same financial journalist:

None of my clients or contacts are ready to talk to you — yet.  I’ll keep checking as they make progress on concrete actions.  Most of my folks have not found sufficient volumes of non-tariffed substitution goods. So, passing along additional costs is their current “contingency plan”. Many still hope that there will be a quick return to status quo ante (ala Columbia — the potential Mexico delay has been received like a jolt of caffeine). There is, of course, no direct impact on physical flows.  So, the consequences depend on how long some significant proportion of consumers are willing to pay higher tariff-related costs… and if these higher value pull signals attract/motivate currently unrecognized sources of push to compete at these higher price-points.  For many products it will probably be a few weeks before we have much confidence in how demand will respond and supply will adapt.  Sorry I don’t have any talkative friends.

A few hours later the “Mexico delay” was confirmed and the hit on Canada was also postponed for thirty days. China has now retaliated in a very restrained way. President Trump expects to talk with President Xi later today.

A personal challenge in all this drama and delay and (can we call it) diplomacy: On March 4 I am scheduled to give rare public remarks on Supply Chain Resilience. That audience will want much more than I could give them today.

Closing status of 2024 US Flows

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, December demand — measured by Personal Consumption Expenditures — increased 0.7 percent compared to November. This was almost twice the rate of increased personal income (0.4 percent) continuing a steady — supply-chain-friendly– ascent in real (inflation-adjusted) consumption that started in mid-2021. See first chart below.

In response to this sustained demand (sustainable is a different issue), US productivity continued to climb. The real US Gross Domestic Product increased 2.3 percent in the fourth quarter of 2024. See second chart below. According to the BEA, “The increase in consumer spending reflected increases in both services and goods. Within services, the leading contributor to the increase was health care. Within goods, the leading contributors to the increase were recreational goods and vehicles as well as motor vehicles and parts.” Employment continues to be what has been considered healthy since the 2008 Great Recession (here and here and here). Real average earnings are at or above pre-pandemic trends.

Connecting demand to supply continues to demonstrate some excess capacity (but less than December 2023 or September 2024 for that matter). Last week Todd Davis at Sonar aggregated the following recent trucking indicators and much more.

  • Spot Rate Trends:
    • December 2024 spot rates peaked due to holiday capacity constraints and shorter hauls, not increased volume.
    • Tender rejection rates rose to 10.16% on Dec. 22, more than double the 2023 Christmas peak of 5.58%.
  • Refrigerated Truckload Market (Reefer):
    • Reefer rates hit seasonal highs in January, driven by protect-from-freeze demand during cold weather.
    • Rejection rates remained above 14% post-Christmas, reflecting tighter capacity than in the dry van market.
  • Dry Van Market:
    • Rejection rates are increasing but remain lower than those in the reefer market, indicating looser capacity.
  • Flatbed Market:
    • Flatbed rates declined throughout late 2024, with recovery unlikely until spring due to seasonal demand lulls.
  • Regional and Seasonal Dynamics:
    • Local freight demand grew by 7% in December, while long-haul shipments dropped nearly 10%, with more freight shifting to intermodal transport.
    • Weather disruptions in January impacted operations, particularly in the Midwest and Southeast.
  • Market Tightness and Outlook:
    • Gradual tightening is evident, with capacity becoming noticeably strained during peak seasons.
    • Spring 2025 could bring capacity challenges if seasonal demand rebounds sharply.

Downstream pull is positive. Upstream push is well-calibrated with pull. There is some turbidity and volatility in the channels between push and pull, but plenty of ability to keep flow going.