Ecommerce Importers Face Increased Risk of Customs Delays

As ecommerce shipments continue to increase each year, new shippers are at high risk for Customs exams, delays, and fines.  In a recent survey, nearly a third of shipments bound to the U.S. were stopped and delayed by U.S. partner government agencies (PGA) because of improper classification or screening. Per the Journal of Commerce, “ecommerce imports to the U.S. most frequently cited delays from the Consumer Product Safety Commission at 49%, followed by Customs and Border Protection at 38%.”

This comes as CBP expands its ecommerce monitoring efforts by establishing the E-Commerce and Small Business Branch, within the Office of Trade. The team will work to “address the various complexities resulting from this new global shift.” The increase in oversight of new importers is designed to protect the flow of trade while also identifying and preventing compromised merchandise from entering into U.S. commerce.

As importers continue to grow and scale their ecommerce businesses, it is critical to be informed of the risks commercial importers face and understand the responsibilities of importing to the United States.

Understanding specific commodity requirements and working with a trusted, compliant Customs broker is essential. As Customs warns, self-classifying an item can be a costly mistake to importers. Knowledgeable brokers (like Shapiro) have years of classification and clearance experience to determine the most accurate duty rate for importers, and subsequently mitigate the risk of exams. “Strong and reliable classification can help avoid hang-ups at Customs agencies and enable transaction screening to avoid doing business with sanction or restricted entities, products, or individuals.” While there is always the chance of a customs exam, clearing under the correct HTS code is certainly one way to lessen the possibility.







Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) Workshop - March 14, 2017

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is holding a free workshop to provide valuable information to parties who are filing allegations or defending against allegations under the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA).

EAPA investigations are new and while CBP has issued regulations, the procedures continue to be refined as CBP gains experience with these inquiries.  The goal of this workshop is to provide parties who are filing allegations or defending against them with an overview of who they will be interacting with at CBP and at which stages in the investigation. It will also teach interested parties what constitutes a valid allegation.

The workshop will provide:

  • An opportunity to engage with CBP officials who enforce trade laws and specifically, EAPA investigations;
  • A walkthrough of a sample case with the team to learn CBP’s procedures and the actions CBP takes to pursue an investigation;
  • Guidance on how to develop strong allegations and learn more about the role of parties in EAPA proceedings.

“Evasion” generally refers to entering merchandise covered by an antidumping/countervailing duty (AD/CVD) order into the customs territory of the United States by means of any document or electronically transmitted data or information, written or oral statement, or act that is material and false, or any omission that is material, and that results in any cash deposit or other security or any amount of applicable antidumping or countervailing duties being reduced or not being applied with respect to the merchandise.

EAPA investigation process diagram and timeline can be found on the CBP’s website.

Visit the CBP website for the full workshop agenda.

When: March 14, 2017, 9:30 AM -1:30PM

Where: 1717 H. St., NW; 7th Floor, Room C, Washington, D.C.

*Due to limited space, registration will be first-come, first-serve.

To register and for additional questions, please contact RAEAPA@cbp.dhs.gov.







C-TPAT 2017 GAO Report Shows Data Problems

The Custom Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) is a voluntary program that has been in place since 2001 that authorizes U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) staff to validate members’ supply chain security practices and ensure they meet the required minimum security criteria. In return for which, members are eligible to receive benefits such as a reduced likelihood their shipments will be examined.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report on February 8, 2017  finding that CBP personnel from the C-TPAT program have faced challenges in meeting C-TPAT security validation responsibilities because of problems with the functionality of the program’s data management system (Portal 2.0).

Ever since the system was updated in August 2015, C-TPAT staff have identified instances in which the Portal 2.0 system incorrectly altered C-TPAT members’ certification or security profile dates, requiring manual verification of member data and impairing the ability of C-TPAT security specialists to identify and complete required security validations in a timely and efficient manner.

CBP staff have outlined recommended actions, along with timeframes for completing the actions. The staff stated that they will continue to work on identifying and addressing potential root causes of the Portal problems through 2017. C-TPAT officials advised that despite the Portal 2.0 problems, they have assurance that required security validations are being tracked and completed as a result of record reviews taking place at field offices.

As a result of faulty data, C-TPAT also found data to be unreliable to document benefits to its members. GAO is recommending that CBP develop (1) standardized guidance for field offices regarding the tracking of information on security validations, and (2) a plan with milestones and completion dates to fix the Dashboard so the C-TPAT program can produce accurate data on C-TPAT member benefits.

The Department of Homeland Security concurred with GAO's recommendations. If you notice any problems with your C-TPAT portal information or validation issues, contact your assigned C-TPAT Supply Chain Security Specialist for resolution.







Apparel and Footwear Importers Fervently Oppose Border Tax

Shortly after taking office, President Trump and the Republican Party proposed a border tax that would fall in line with efforts to revitalize domestic manufacturing and U.S. exports. The proposed border tax would require American importers to add their total cost of goods to their profit when determining their tax bill, leading to highly increased costs for imported goods. Roughly 97% of apparel and footwear are imported, meaning the apparel and footwear industries would likely be the hardest hit should the border tax stick.

The American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA), which is comprised of thousands of the top brands in the apparel and footwear industries, feels that should the border tax pass in its current iteration, then it will lead to drastically increased consumer costs that will have an insurmountable negative effect on demand. While the overarching goal of the border tax is admirable, the AAFA also feels that America doesn’t possess the proper, technically-trained workforce to replace a highly-skilled Asian workforce.  Stephen Lamar, the Executive Vice President of the AAFA, believes that, “it would take a generation or two for the U.S. textile industry to get to such a level.”

If the border tax does pass with its current language, it is sure to start some controversy with other key world players. The likely ramifications of the implementation of a border tax would be complaints against the U.S. via the World trade Organization (WTO), as well as retaliation in the form of extra taxes and duties being levied against U.S. exports.







ITC Reaffirms AD/CVD Ruling on Chinese Manufactured Bedroom Furniture

On January 10, 2017 the International Trade Commission (ITC) voted to keep the existing antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China. The ITC reasoned that disregarding previously levied duties would cause harm to the domestic industry and as such, the existing duty rates, some as high as 216%, will remain in place.

The AD/CVD case against Chinese manufactured bedroom furniture originated in 2005 when the Department of Commerce (DOC) found that dumping was occurring in the U.S. market. The DOC is required to reevaluate their determinations in AD/CVD cases every 5 years to determine whether their initial ruling should stand or be reversed. In March of 2016, the DOC upheld it’s ruling on Chinese manufactured bedroom furniture for the second 5 year period in a row.

The ITC, which is charged with auditing DOC rulings in regard to ADCVD issues, upheld the DOC’s verdict. Now that the ITC has confirmed the verdict, a notice will be posted in the Federal Register in the coming weeks.







EU-US Beef Dispute-List of Products Under Consideration for Imposition of Increased Duties

The United States Trade Representative (USTR) is reconsidering trade action against the European Union (EU) Beef ban with a public hearing and request for comments. On February 24, 2017, an extension was published in the Federal Register for submission of post-hearing rebuttal comments to March 8, 2017. Comments already numbered 11,511 on February 26, 2017.

Background: A long running dispute centering on the EU’s ban of U.S. imports of beef treated with hormones is heating up again after an agreement, made back in 2009, ended with the U.S. canceling import tariffs on several items.

The EU has increased importation of non-U.S. beef and has not addressed the market access issue.

The EU bans the import of beef and beef products produced from animals to which any of six hormones have been administered for growth-promotion purposes. The six hormones at issue are estradiol 17-b, testosterone, progesterone, zeranol, trenbolone acetate (TBA) and melengestrol acetate (MGA). The effect of the EU ban is to prohibit the import of all but specially-produced U.S. beef and beef products.

The products listed below are under consideration for the imposition of increased duties in accordance with the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) authorization in the EU-Beef dispute. In particular, increased tariffs may be applied to articles that are: (i) classified in the numerical headings and subheadings of the HTS listed below; and, (ii) products of one or more of the member States of the EU.

Importers of these products should watch closely to see if a resolution of the EU-US Beef Ban can be reached. If a resolution is not reached, the U.S. may be within its rights to assess additional import duties on these products.

For the full list of impacted HTS codes, visit the December 28, 2016 Federal Register notice.







CBP Gives Interim Instructions for TIB Entries

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has provided some “interim” instructions for Temporary Importation Bond (TIB; Type 23) entries while awaiting deployment of related functions in the newly-launched Automated Commercial Environment (ACE).

In a Feb. 16 notice from CBP Port Director, Jorge Roig, for Port Everglades announced that “with the implementation of [ACE] Cargo Release functionality for all entry types and the subsequent policy decision to no longer require paper CBP Forms 3461 or 7501 at the time of entry, a paperless process is needed for Temporary Importation Bond (TIB) entries to replace the export examina­tion decision and stamp required by CBP regulations.” The announcement also cited that “while a fully electronic transaction is being planned for this functionality, there is no known date of deployment or development. In the interim, the following steps should be taken by CBP and the trade for all Type 23, TIB entries present.”

All TIB entries are deemed as “Export Examination Not Required” at the time of release unless des­ignated otherwise and CBP will review submitted TIBs regularly to determine the need for examinations. “To maintain paperless process, fully electronic entries will be designated for examination using the text message ‘Export Examination Required’ via the SO70 message set,” which will “most likely be sent to the filer post release,” CBP said. Paper entries should continue to be stamped if an export exam is neces­sary, it said.

A completed CBP Form 3495 should be given at the time of export to the port of export “identifying the shipment to be examined and to record examination completion as per current procedures,” CBP said. “In lieu of a stamped CBP Form 3461/7501, the original entry number, date of entry and port of entry in­formation should be provided as well as invoices etc. from original importation.” The agency will try to use system information when possible, “but the full automation of this information has not been completed and filers will still need to provide documentation as provided,” it said. “Trade partners may request an export examination for any shipment where the examination was not required via the same process."







CBP Reviewing Liquidated Damages Cases Issued for Late and Non-Payment Duty

On February 16, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced that Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) cargo release will use the estimated date of arrival to enhance the accuracy of the release date. Once the cargo has arrived at its designated Port of Entry, ACE Cargo Release will update the release date to the actual date of arrival. This actual arrival date/release date will then become the start date for the 10-day window for Entry Summary filing.

This action is a response for an error in the agency’s internal computer, which caused inaccurate release dates and impacted some duty payment date deadlines. In some instances, liquidated damages were issued automatically based upon these wrong deadlines and the liquidated damages were doubled when the broker petitioned for relief.

If issues arise related to incorrect release date behavior and you received liquidated damages, please contact us at compliance@shapiro.com

To search the CBP CSMS notifications, go to:  https://apps.cbp.gov/csms







3PLs Turn to Technology as Ecommerce Pressures the ‘Middle Mile'

The transportation leg from the port to the distribution center, also known as the “middle mile,” is getting an upgrade as Third Party Logistics providers (3PLs) focus on making the routing faster and more efficient. The pressure for change comes from growing ecommerce freight demands on a limited capacity carrier market and high customer expectations. Expectations set by retail giants like Amazon, whose Prime services offers two-day, free shipping, have caused similar revolutions in other parts of the supply chain industry; most notably, the delivery from the warehouse to the customer’s door, referred to as the ‘last mile.’ Freight brokers are working to streamline operations through data analytics in order to meet ecommerce seller needs in transforming the middle mile.

Certain parts of the middle mile, however, are not changing: less-than-load (LTL), truckload, or partial truckload moves are still the methods of transportation to get products from the port to the warehouse. Technology, however, is allowing this segment to evolve.  3PLs and freight brokers are utilizing supportive decision-making data analytic software to assist dispatchers in booking more efficient moves in less time. To optimize these moves, providers are able to create more versatile origin-to-destination port pair routings, in addition to assigning the best mode of transport for the supplier and/or seller, whether that be via LTL, truckload delivery or some other combination thereof.







Robust Freight Demand Invigorating U.S. Inventories

U.S. businesses saw the biggest monthly increase in sales in over six years indicating freer flowing, rising inventories.  According to the U.S. Census Bureau, total business sales increased 2 percent in December from November and 5.2 percent year-over-year.

This past November, the retail inventory-to-sales ratio slipped from 1.48 to 1.47, while the wholesale ratio fell from 1.31 to 1.29 and the ratio for manufacturers dropped from 1.34 to 1.31. The data indicates a shift from slow-moving to more rapid sales and shipping cycles. According to Mario O. Moreno, a senior economist at IHS Maritime & Trade, “Sales are increasing at a good pace, but inventories are still growing.” Moreno predicts U.S. containerized imports to rise 6 percent in 2017.

A 56 percent year-over-year increase in the DAT North American Spot Market Freight Index is yet another sign of increased freight demand.  Spot van, refrigerated, and flatbed rates in January were higher year-over-year, but an influx of capacity from contract carriers into the spot market depressed rates.

Shippers are becoming more skilled at combining large amounts of parcel deliveries into consolidations, and broken down after reaching designated deconsolidation hubs.  As long as consumers and the market remain confident, inventory patterns should continue to drive the market upwards.







U.S. Resin Exports Have Many Routing Options

The United States has become the world’s lowest-cost producer of synthetic resins due to shale-gas feedstocks and petrochemical companies, who have been investing billions in expanding production.  Most resin manufacturing is located around the Gulf Coast, where a majority of the material is slotted for export markets.  Due to the lack of stability in labor negotiations and scars from the West Coast port strike a few years back, logistics managers are making sure they have several routing options for the hot commodity.

Shippers will turn to local ports first, which should provide the best cost options.  Houston is centrally located to production and in 2016, handled 42% of U.S. containerized exports of resins.  However, intermodal rail is available via Dallas-Fort Worth, providing shippers with options to route through the West and/or East Coasts, not having to rely solely on one particular port.

Ship capacity and empty-container availability will help drive the decision making process and rates will play an important role in determining whether empty containers are available where needed and, if carriers add capacity back into the market.  With forecasts showing U.S. resin exports increasing to as much as 500,000 TEU’s, it appears that there will be plenty of exports and all available routes will be utilized.







U.S. West Coast Asia Import Market Share Drops

2016 marked over a decade of Asian import market share loss for West Coast ports, unlike the East Coast, which has steadily increased to own 30.5 percent market share.  The shift began after West Coast ports gridlocked over labor negotiations between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA).

At that time, the U.S. West Coast ports focused on port efficiencies, but many of the largest retailers and importers had already built import distribution centers closer to East and Gulf Coast gateways.  For many large inland distribution points, such as Chicago and Memphis, the Canadian West Coast Ports gained popularity, further eroding market share.  The shift to Canadian ports for the upper Midwest has saved importers as much as $300 to $400 per container in landed costs.

Importers began to see rates to the U.S. East Coast ports plummet in recent years due to East Coast efficiency in port dredging to accommodate carrier introduced mega-vessels, which have allowed for additional volume.  Intermodal rail rates have increased dramatically in the past 10 years (between 25 and 35 percent), further eroding incentive for West Coast routings.

West Coast port productivity, conversely, has slowed since the introduction of mega vessels causing ports to grapple with space issues making it more difficult to manage the chassis and transfers in California ports.

West Coast ports are fighting back with efforts to prevent further loss by taking advantage of their deeper harbors, excellent rail networks, and well-established concentration of import distribution centers in California.   The ports are working hard to increase productivity by expanding terminal automation and providing digitized information to connect everyone involved in the supply chain for cargo entering their ports.







Opposition towards India’s Import Tax Go Ignored

In early January 2017, the Indian government announced a new tax on international logistics services in regard to Indian imports.  The 4.5% ‘import tax’ applies to any prepaid shipments imported to India, significantly affecting freight rates from North America and China to India.  The increased costs and confusion resulting from this imposed tax on Indian imports has sparked opposition from shippers and trade groups alike.

“There’s no positive outcome from our discussions with government authorities and hence, the new tax law prevails, as of now,” one local trade representative told JOC.com. In addition to increased costs, both shippers and trade groups have experienced operational issues due to the law’s vagueness, adding to frustrations.

The International Federation of Freight Forwarders Associations (FIATA) has urged its members to avoid paying the tax to steamship lines, pending feedback from Indian authorities as to how the service tax would apply to transactions involving two foreign entities that are not within the local tax regime.

Alternatively, various carriers such as OOCL, CMA-CGM, Hamburg Süd, and Hapag-Lloyd have released notices to their customers advising they “reserve the right to collect this service tax in India from the consignee if the shipper advises that such tax should be on ‘collect’ basis.  This tax will be collected prior to release of delivery order.”

Although the Narendra Modi run government has made the reduction of logistics costs and barriers to trade a focal point of their rule, one trade official has stated, “The implementation of such tax countervails the government’s earnest in achieving ease of doing business, leading to loss of business to Indian enterprises.”  Despite growing opposition towards the service tax on prepaid imports to India, it appears a rollback of the new import tax seems unlikely.







Asia to U.S. Rate Rollercoaster Continues

Trans-pacific rates continue to be a carnival ride as we head towards the end of the first quarter. Current rates have been determining since the middle of February but shouldn’t be expected to last long.  Shippers have been hoping rates to settle in March leading up to new alliance services and beneficial cargo owner (BCO) contract season; however, with carriers continuing to skip sailings and remove capacity from the market, this seems unlikely.

At the same time, the volume is reported to be returning and at a faster pace than expected.  Looking ahead this month, signs of rate-level stability are still yet to be seen. We can likely expect the announced GRI of $480/20’ and $600/40’, which are currently scheduled for beginning of the month to be pushed to March 15th.







Carriers Making Efforts to Control Over-capacity

As highlighted in the February issue of Shap Talk, carriers are struggling with the impending influx of larger vessels that are slated to be delivered throughout 2017. The over-capacity witnessed in 2016 pushed carriers to create new strategies in order to balance the supply and demand. Blank sailings, alliances, and vessel sharing are amongst some of the strategies implemented, but some carriers are going so far as to delay previous orders for new vessels, which they hope will help quell the deteriorating situation.

One carrier in particular, Maersk Line, has pushed back their order of nine vessels to the end of 2018 in order to better control capacity throughout the current year. Although Maersk has delayed the construction of these 9 vessels until 2018, the arrival of around 1.5 million TEUs of capacity into the market will contribute heavily to the over-saturated market. The industry will more than likely see other carriers follow a similar path as Maersk, since over-capacity is an issue for all steamship lines. Drewry Shipping Consultants recently commented on the current situation stating, “Where Maersk leads, others tend to follow, and we have heard other owners are preparing to do the same, although at this stage it is unclear to what extent.”







Carriers and Shippers Suffering from Rising Fuel Prices

It’s no surprise that bunker fuel makes up a majority of the operating costs for ocean carriers, but with fuel prices on the rise, carriers, shippers, and beneficial cargo owners will feel the brunt of the pain. Rising fuel costs have carriers scrambling to lock in higher, all-in trans-Pacific service rates, especially heading into April’s contract season.

According to the JOC, “As container lines seek higher trans-Pacific service contracts after last season’s record-low rate signings, they will have to seek higher all-in rates since the BAF for this year's contract talks will likely be up around 42 percent and 39 percent from the same period last year to the West and East/Gulf coasts, respectively” which will only add to the tumultuous situation that many ocean carriers are currently experiencing.

Carriers will have to determine if they will be able to pass off these increases to their customers after purchasing fuel at the higher rates. In essence, ocean carriers will need to spend billions of dollars on more expensive fuel without having the incoming capital to offset the increase. The rising bunker prices, up around $180 per ton from this time last year, will have carriers pushing for higher rates, better operational efficiency, and will only add to the growing list of concerns facing the ocean carrier market.







Airfreight Market, 2016 Review and 2017 Outlook

According to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the global air cargo market reached a five-year peak in 2016, but is now facing threats from static world trade and protectionism.

Traffic may have risen by 3.8 percent last year, however, it lagged behind the 5.3 percent increase in freight capacity. European carriers accounted for almost half of the total increase in freight shipments.  EU airlines increased traffic by 7.6 percent overall in 2016, assisted by an early Chinese New Year that accounted for 16.4 percent year-over-year surge in December.

According to Alexandre de Juniac, IATA’s Director General and CEO, “In terms of demand, 2016 was a good year for air cargo. That was boosted by solid year-end performance. Looking ahead, strong export orders are good news.”

“Airlines continue to deliver strong results. This year we expect a record net profit of $35.6 billion.  Even though conditions in 2017 will be more difficult with rising oil prices, we see the industry earning $29.8 billion. That’s a very soft landing and safely in profitable territory. These three years are the best performance in the industry’s history—irrespective of the many uncertainties we face. Indeed, risks are abundant— political, economic and security among them. And controlling costs is still a constant battle in our hyper-competitive industry,” said Juniac.

The air cargo industry still faces new and recurring challenges in 2017 such as overcapacity and a slow economic growth. Oil prices are expected to rise which will have the biggest impact on the airfreight growth. The increase in the oil price per barrel will result in an increase in the jet fuel prices.  In addition, capacity growth will surpass the increase in demand, thus lowering the global load factor; and, a sudden shift in trade policies and agreements will definitely have an impact on international trade.







Pier Pass’ Biggest Challenges and Possible Solutions

Pierpass has been very successful with helping the Los Angeles-Long Beach port grow while maintaining the quality of life of the highly-populated, surrounding areas. However, the off-peak gates operations, founded by the PierPass traffic mitigation fee, continue to be criticized by truckers and beneficial cargo owners alike.

The complaints range from congestion at the beginning of the night shift to early gate closings prior to the end of the night shifts. Per the FMC Chairman, Mario Cordero, port stakeholders feel the extended rates get higher every year but the service remains very unreliable and doesn’t improve with the annual fee increase. Some believe the night gate is not very functional, creating long lines at the port hours before the evening gates are open. The long queues also create traffic problems and some terminals close the gate as early as 9:00 p.m., without prior notification.

One of the biggest issues falls on the understanding of who is the responsible party for the problems. Although most terminal stakeholders believe PierPass system is the main cause of most issues, PierPass President, John Cushing, believes most of the issues are operational and should be addressed with the individual terminals.

Regardless of who is to blame, PierPass is working on two main options to improve the extended-gate system. The first focus is on shifting from a daytime fee to a lower flat fee charged to all containers, regardless of the time of pick or delivery. The second option involves a “peel-off” program in which truckers will take the first container available rather than waiting for a specific box.







U.S. LTL Trucking Demand Grows in Q4 2016

After a rocky 2016, U.S. truckers are more bullish in 2017, owing to positive fourth quarter numbers for the industry. For the first time since the end of 2014, LTL shipments and tonnage per work day rose year-over-year, with some LTL carriers noting a continuation of this trend into 2017. Two areas of improvement in terms of demand have been highlighted for LTL trucking that will require further attention as the year progresses.

First, the industry has seen its primary clientele, industrial freight, grow moderately in late 2016 and early 2017. The PMI Index from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) notes that industrial output in both December 2016 and January 2017 displayed growth, continuing a trend of five straight months of growth.  Second, LTL carriers are starting to receive more cargo for retailers, as retailers change their distribution strategies to better address e-commerce demands - a move that has been strengthened by reductions in retail inventories that have led to strong increases in replenishment orders.

With these increases in demand, LTL truckers are now taking the opportunity to increase their revenue. Increasing fuel rates are providing LTL carriers with the opportunity to increase margins through higher fuel surcharges. LTL carriers have also been able to leverage constrained supply to support rate hikes, with shippers advising of 3-5 percent rate hikes in initial contract talks with LTL carriers this year.

 







Amazon Trucking, a Stable Operation

Amazon, the dominant and progressive online retailer, has purchased thousands of branded semi-trucks to help augment their business model and take more control of its shipping routes. The move will affect the trucking industry directly, which ships millions of packages a day between Amazon distribution centers and the warehouses belonging to home-delivery carriers such as FedEx and United Parcel Service Inc.  Amazon is seeking to secure future booming business and enable Amazon to fulfill delivery promises. It is also very likely that Amazon will partner with trucking companies and trucking industry organizations such as truck brokers, and truck driver recruiters, which should produce significant opportunities overall for the trucking business.

Several trucking companies that are already servicing Amazon deliveries have pointed out growth opportunities in this new announcement without fear or anxiety.  The suppliers involved benefits Amazon’s entire import – export domestic portfolio, as stronger alliances will be made to guarantee the demand does not overwhelm them.







Charleston Office Relocation

Shapiro is excited to announce that our Charleston office will be relocating on Monday, March 13, 2017.  The office will remain open for standard business hours on Friday, March 10 and will close promptly at 5:00 p.m. EST.  Phone calls and emails will be monitored for any urgent inquiries.

Where’s the new office?

115 Central Island Street

One Central Island Plaza | Suite 350

Charleston, SC, 29492

Phone and fax numbers will remain the same.







Employee of the Month

As previously featured in Shap Talk, Shapiro has been sharing with you the names of employees who have been recognized for their exceptional efforts and contributions to our Company. At Shapiro, we continually work to develop, challenge, and inspire all of our employees to grow individually and with the Company. This month, we would like to recognize Natalia Gorbunova, Global Logistics Export Supervisor in Baltimore for her outstanding performance and contributions.

We encourage you to provide us with employee feedback! Please email us at hr@shapiro.com.