For better or for worse, prospects of North American container ports are married to a number of key geo-political and economic trends, not only for 2026 but for years into the future.

Uncertainty Principle

For the most part, “The Top Twenty North American Container Ports,” posted strong container throughput figures in 2025. As the Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Gene Seroka of the Port of Los Angeles, North America’s largest container port, said at a media briefing in December, “Even with all the trade uncertainty, we’ll finish 2025 north of 10 million TEUs, putting this year firmly in our top three of all time.”

Of course, the operative word in Seroka’s assessment of 2025, was “uncertainty”. And the truth is that for better or worse the prospects North America’s container ports in 2026 is married to a number of geo-political and economic trends, which underscore the “uncertainty” factor— not only for the North American container ports but global trade as a whole.

The National Retail Federation (NRF) in their January 9th release wrote, “Import volume at the nation’s major container ports is forecast to see its first month-over-month gain in six months during January but is expected to remain down year over year until spring,” based on data from their “Global Port Tracker” assembled by the NRF and Hackett Associates. The data from the NRF report noted that the “first half of 2025 totaled 12.53 million TEU, up 3.7% year over year.” And projects the “full year [2025] is forecast at 25.4 million TEU, down 0.4% from 25.5 million TEU in 2024.” [Editor’s note: These numbers are largely in line with projected numbers in the AJOT’s ‘The Top Twenty North American Container’ chart derived largely from port authorities.] Ben Hackett, Hackett Associates founder noted, “Following ‘chronic uncertainty’ from increased US tariffs in 2025, the impact on cargo imports in 2026 is likely to still be affected by trade policy. Hackett added, “As 2026 begins, we see a world increasingly focused on protecting domestic industries and addressing perceived trade imbalances… This approach has raised questions about the future of free trade and international economic cooperation.”

2026: “Stockade Economics”

“And international cooperation” and free trade might be hard to come by in 2026. Steven Vickers, president of Steve Vickers and Associates, a Hong Kong-based risk analysis company, describes the global protectionist trend as “stockade economics”.

Vickers, a longtime observer of the Asian business and political trends, recently opened his Jan 19th SVA newsletter on “Strategic Risk to Asia in 2026”, stating, “Tectonic changes to regional trade are under way, and separating out economic and security considerations is becoming close to impossible. The risk of regional conflict is also intensifying, owing to tensions over Taiwan, the South China Sea, and other flashpoints.” And Vickers adding in his analysis that nations in the region have made, “A turn towards “stockade economics”, albeit on a partial basis, and…varying speeds.”

However, Asia isn’t alone, as the US has begun surrounding the country’s economic infrastructure with a fortress of regulatory measures, compelling other nations around the world to do the same.

And Vickers observations are important, as Asia and particularly China is still the region that fill the containers that fill the ships that call on US ports and end up filling the NRF’s reports.

John D. McCown, author of the widely cited McCown Report, which tracks the volumes of the ten largest US container ports largely agrees with the NRF TEU port volume assessment with some nuanced analysis on the impact of tariffs and container trade trends.

In an interview with the AJOT, McCown said, “At one point, I thought that we could see something like a 20% reduction in volume from tariffs — and in theory, the tariff reduction should be a one-time hit. And then you go back to whatever your [TEU] growth is. Although it’s going to probably be less [TEU volume] going forward. But it’s just a head scratcher because we now have an administration that really seems to be an all-out assault on trade.”

As the China Lunar New Year approaches — the Year of the Horse — international trade will enter its annual lull period. Following Christmas and the New Year holiday period there is usually a brief increase of container volumes, a partial restocking of inventories. For containership analysts this period is a sort of preview to what the year might look like. However, the administration’s chaotic approach in applying tariffs [at this writing a decision on a challenge to invalidate the administration’s International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariff policy in the US Supreme Court has not yet been determined] has disrupted normal trading patterns — as ‘reaction’ to disruptions rather than ‘planning’ dominates supply chain decisions. But even should the Supreme Court rule against the administration’s tariff policy there undoubtedly will be a plan “B”. So, it is unlikely that the specter of tariffs will be resolved in 2026.

NRF Vice President for Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jonathan Gold in analyzing the current situation said, “There should be a brief bump in imports this month ahead of Lunar New Year factory shutdowns in Asia, but we’re otherwise headed into the post-holiday shipping lull that comes each year. Retailers had a busy holiday season and are assessing what’s ahead in 2026 so they can keep supply chains running smoothly... Retailers are hoping for more stability and certainty, especially regarding tariffs and trade policy, in 2026….”

Greenland, Bazooka Diplomacy and World Trade

Contributing greatly to that trade uncertainty is the capriciousness of White House policies and their impact on global trade. And nowhere is that more obvious than in the President’s efforts to take control of Greenland — an island that has been a part of Denmark since 1814 and an autonomous territory of the Danish nation since 1953.

When a number of European nations balked at the threat of a takeover of Greenland, Trump issued tariff threats of 10% beginning February 1st against eight European nations, including Denmark, Norway, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. According to Trump these tariffs will increase to 25% on June 1st.

Trump, speaking in Davos (Jan. 21, 2026) at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland reiterated much of what he previously had stated about annexing Greenland but, in the speech, he emphasized, “I won’t take Greenland by force.”

This was hardly the conciliatory message European leaders had hoped for…but rather the one they expected. And minutes after the speech the European Union (EU) suspended work on the US-EU trade agreement. Under the proposed agreement the EU would drop most of its tariffs while the US would retain a base rate of 15%. The agreement was expected to be approved by the EU with a vote on the proposals on January 26-27, 2026.

And it was widely reported that Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on International Trade, said the group would consider countering US policies by deploying an ‘anti-coercion instrument’ nicknamed a ‘trade bazooka’. The trade bazooka Lange is referring to is essentially a number of retaliatory measures designed to restrict or block trade and investment from countries, like the US, who are putting unwarranted pressure on EU countries (i.e. Denmark) or corporations. In short, it is a measured retaliatory strike in a trade war.

Overnight, following the Davos speech, Trump announced that he would back off the threatened tariffs that would be levied on the European nations and allies and that a deal was in place. At this writing Denmark disagrees with Trump’s assessment of the situation.

But the spat over Greenland is another in the ongoing disruptions and threatens global trade. And the collateral causalities in these trade wars envelopes all the participants in the supply chain including the container ports. So, it isn’t surprising US ports on all coasts are battening down the hatches for an unsettled 2026.

The Future for North American Container Ports

Irrespective of the current chaos, North America’s top container ports are preparing for a future that involves much greater volumes than exist today.

As Dr. Noel Hacegaba, who recently succeeded Mario Cordero as CEO of the Port of Long Beach (the second largest port in the US) and was the only US port director invited to attend Davos meetings noted, “Our [Port of Long Beach] new long-term cargo forecast predicts we will double our annual container volume at Long Beach by 2050. Achieving that will require visionary innovation, advances in workforce development and international cooperation as never before.”

In real terms that means the Port of Long Beach is expecting the annual volumes to reach nearly 20 million TEUs within 24-years. And what is expected for Long Beach isn’t much different than the expectations for all North America’s top container ports.

How America’s container ports handle higher volumes in the not-too-distant future will challenge the composition of the nation’s container ports and the inland services system.

West Coast container ports, especially the San Pedro ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, have been for decades the dominate gateways for US imports from Asia.

However, in recent years the percentage of imports coming through the West Coast has slipped. US East Coast ports, especially in the US Southeast have garnered a larger share. So, have the ports in the Gulf, like Houston, New Orleans and Mobile. This isn’t surprising with the shifts in population demographics and a greater availability of land near ports.

Also shifts in sourcing have also played a role, as the de-coupling from China has led to an increase in imports from alternative trade partners like Vietnam and India with routings that favor going West to the US East Coast rather than Transpacific to the West Coast.

Still, these are challenges for tomorrow. Today, is all about “uncertainty” and a hope for some vestige of stability.