Sea Global (USA) LLC Company News

President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that he is extending the existing tariffs with Mexico, America’s largest trading partner, and he will pause higher tariffs that were set to go into effect on Friday. That means the status quo will continue, in which goods from Mexico are taxed at 25%, unless they are compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada trade deal Trump signed under his first term. In those instances, goods won’t face any tariffs, barring certain sectoral tariffs in place. “I have just concluded a telephone conversation with the President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, which was very successful in that, more and more, we are getting to know and understand each other,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “The complexities of a Deal with Mexico are somewhat different than other Nations because of both the problems and assets of the Border. We have agreed to extend, for a 90-day period, the exact same Deal as we had for the last short period of time.” It’s unclear whether there will be exclusions on certain goods for the other countries Trump has sent letters to heads of state threatening to raise tariffs. This is a developing story and will be updated.

The White House's latest executive order announces that, effective August 29, the U.S. will fully suspend the de minimis tariff exemption policy for small-value parcels. This change will directly impact the operational costs of all cross-border sellers. Under the new regulations, commercial packages valued at $800 or below will no longer qualify for duty-free treatment under the de minimis rule. Cross-border sellers will now be required to pay either ad valorem duties or flat-rate tariffs for each item. For goods shipped via the international postal system, cross-border sellers will face flat-rate tariffs ranging from $80 to $200, depending on the IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) tariff rate of the product's country of origin. This policy adjustment means that fulfillment costs for cross-border sellers will increase significantly, particularly impacting e-commerce businesses specializing in low-cost goods. The elimination of the U.S. de minimis tariff exemption forces cross-border sellers to reassess their pricing strategies and logistics approaches, likely squeezing profit margins in the cross-border e-commerce industry.

On July 29, the United States and China held the third round of tariff negotiations in Sweden. Based on the consensus reached in the new round of economic and trade talks, both sides agreed to extend the suspended 24% reciprocal U.S. tariffs and China's countermeasures for an additional 90 days. This means that all current tariff rates imposed by both sides, along with the corresponding countermeasures, will remain unchanged, extending beyond the original August 12 expiration date by another 90 days. The first day of talks lasted over five hours, but neither side issued a statement afterward. The agenda of this round of negotiations included allowing more time for discussions on issues such as fentanyl and crude oil energy. Prior to this meeting, the U.S. and China had already completed the first two rounds of talks in Geneva and London in May and June, respectively. Achievements from the earlier rounds included mutual tariff reductions, the establishment of a truce period set to expire on August 12, and eased restrictions on exports of rare earth minerals and semiconductors.

In July 2025, a shipper filed a massive $14.7 million claim with the U.S. Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) against carrier Yang Ming Marine Transport, marking the second-largest single claim received by the FMC since the Ocean Shipping Reform Act (OSRA) took effect. Just two weeks earlier, Ocean Network Express (ONE) was slapped with an $18.1 million penalty after being sued by Cornerstone Brands and OVC for failing to meet even half of its contracted shipping volume. For the FMC, Yang Ming is no stranger. Shortly after the 2022 U.S. legislative reforms made claims easier to file, the Taiwanese carrier was pursued by a food shipper over unpaid debts. Now, Yang Ming faces a $14.7 million lawsuit from discount retailer Dollar General for failing to meet its minimum volume commitments. Breach of Contract & Capacity Manipulation Dollar General alleges that Yang Ming consistently failed to fulfill its service obligations from the very start of the contract, severely restricting allocated space while selling the same slots to NVOCCs at much higher rates. In one instance, Yang Ming provided only 24% of the promised capacity—despite guaranteeing "at least 130% weekly space" in the contract. During a 14-week forecast period (August–October 2021), Yang Ming defaulted 11 times, leaving a cumulative shortfall of 414 FEU. The carrier initially blamed port congestion and blank sailings, but later admitted the shortages were orchestrated by its Taipei headquarters. Even Yang Ming’s U.S. representatives reportedly expressed frustration with leadership, yet told Dollar General they "could do nothing." Financial Fallout Yang Ming had pledged to ship 2,226 FEU over the one-year contract but delivered just 616 FEU—a 73% deficit. Dollar General was forced to pay premium rates for alternative shipping or abandon shipments entirely, incurring losses of at least $14.77 million. Though smaller than Bed Bath & Beyond’s $32 million claim against OOCL in 2022, this case is now the second-largest claim under OSRA. Since the law’s passage three years ago, the FMC has handled ~50 cases against carriers and logistics firms, totaling over $100 million in disputes. Broader Implications These incidents underscore the ongoing compliance crisis in container shipping, where carriers face mounting scrutiny over capacity allocation, pricing transparency, and contractual accountability.