S4.E28 - Trade Turbulence and Tech Advances

🚢 By Land and By Sea Podcast – an attorney breaking down the week in supply chain
🎙️ Captain’s Log – “Trade Turbulence and Tech Advances”
🗓️ Week of July 11, 2025

The Maritime Professor® presents By Land and By Sea Podcast – an attorney breaking down the week in supply chain
with Lauren Beagen (Founder of The Maritime Professor® and Squall Strategies®)

This week, I’m unpacking:

🔹 Chinese container ships get permission to sail Russia’s Arctic Northern Sea Route—an emerging maritime chokepoint with global supply chain impacts
🔹 China merges CSSC and CSIC to create the world’s largest shipbuilder amid shifting global demand and trade tensions
🔹 The White House extends reciprocal tariffs on imports from multiple countries through August 1, 2025
🔹 FMC reorganizes competition staff to enhance enforcement of fair trade practices in ocean shipping
🔹 US Bank completes first trade finance transaction using electronic Bills of Lading—a key step toward digital maritime transformation
🔹 Are we missing executive leadership in maritime? A look at recent leadership gaps, NSC shakeups, and the need for action

🎧 Tune in to hear the full breakdown in plain language: www.TheMaritimeProfessor.com/podcast

Want to bring this kind of insight to your team? Explore corporate trainings and webinars with The Maritime Professor® at www.TheMaritimeProfessor.com.

⚠️ This content is for educational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice.

🎙️ New to streaming or looking to level up? Check out StreamYard and get $10 discount! 😍 https://lnkd.in/gpQc_WtG

Chapters

• 0:59 Maritime news headlines
• 3:35 Chinese shipbuilding merger creates global giant
• 7:15 White House extends reciprocal tariffs
• 10:47 FMC reorganizes competition oversight
• 14:56 Electronic bills of lading breakthrough
• 24:13 Maritime leadership vacuum concerns
• 30:48 Maritime policy deadlines approaching

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:07

I got soul coming through. Don't stop in the beat. And on top of the world, catwalk to the beat when you see me coming, mixing blue. Everywhere I go, I'm in the spotlight. This is a good life. I'm living bold. This is what good night. I'm living bold. This is what it looks like. I'm a ticket out of the world.

Speaker 1: 0:59

Are electronic bills of lading officially taking off in the US? We'll see. And the FMC reshuffled its competition team. Did you miss that? There's a lot happening that potentially could reshape maritime trade. Stick around to find out what all this means for you and for the future of shipping.

Speaker 1: 1:17

Hi, welcome back to by Land and by Sea, an attorney breaking down the weakened supply chain presented by the maritime professor. Me, I'm Lauren Began, former FMC International Affairs Attorney, founder of the Maritime Professor and Skoll Strategies. By Landed by Sea is your friendly guide to the regulatory twists and turn of global ocean shipping and me, well, I'm your favorite maritime attorney making sense of it all. So you don't have to. As always, the guidance is general and for educational purposes only. It should not be construed to be legal advice and there's no attorney-client privilege created by this video or this podcast. If you need an attorney, contact an attorney. This is plain language, maritime created for anyone not just lawyers or industry insiders can understand what's happening in the world of shipping.

Speaker 1: 2:01

Let's dive into this week's episode because, as you know, ocean shipping moves the world. All right. Story number one Chinese container ships get permission to sail Russia's Arctic Northern Sea Route. So the Russian government this week recently allowed Chinese container vessels to use the Northern Sea Route. This cuts shipping time between Asia and Europe by navigating along Russia's Arctic coast. So I bring this up because we've recently talked about the Northern Sea Route when we were talking about the Federal Maritime Commission investigating maritime choke points. That's where shipping can get bottlenecked, as the FMC was looking into. This Arctic Northern Sea Route is one of those choke points with unique challenges ice conditions, limited ports and this is interesting and significant because it signals that this shipping route that was otherwise very Arctic might be a viable option for commercial container vessels to use more frequently. If so, and if more ships are going to be taking this route, it could change supply chain timing and costs. It also might increase some of the challenges, some of the possibilities, for it clearly was designated in the investigation as a bottleneck, so there might be some other things that we're watching here and I think something that the FMC perhaps already knew that this area, which is why it was listed, could be a newer, more emerging area for container shipping routes. So that was reported from G-Captain and a really interesting story. Story number two this was also brought to us by G-Captain and also was I'll just jump into it.

Speaker 1: 3:48

So China state-owned shipbuilding titan, cssc and CSIC have merged to create the world's largest shipbuilding company. So this is a move that consolidates their strengths and streamlines resources amid some challenging global market changes that have been happening recently. So by no means is China been knocked off of its perch of the number one shipbuilding country in the world. But look, this merger isn't just about scale. It might also be I guess I'm kind of reading it to potentially be a response to what's being reported recently as potentially declining global demand for new ships out of China. Right, there might be increasing production costs generally, but it's this geopolitical tensions and some of the trade tensions that might have necessitated. Perhaps I don't know Right, I might be kind of reading into that that might have necessitated.

Speaker 1: 4:45

Perhaps, I don't know right, I might be kind of reading into that, but it's interesting that shortly after the USTR port fees proposal, designed to incentivize shipping on non-Chinese vessels non-operated or built Chinese vessels and then subsequent reports coming out saying that the order book has been significantly or at least increasingly reducing on Chinese orders, ships on order out of China, that perhaps this is all connected right. I'm kind of just. These are my opinions and I'm just trying to connect some dots that I'm seeing here. Maybe has nothing to do with it, maybe this was always going to be a combination of these two companies, but I can't help but wonder if that threat of USTR port fees that we're still expecting to, I think, hit in October, if the threat of these USTR port fees on China built interoperated vessels and the subsequent decline has been reported in ship orders from these Chinese shipbuilders, maybe it's putting pressure here on these two companies and maybe I don't know right. This is just kind of I don't know, just trying to put things together, but perhaps this merger might be a result of that. It doesn't say that for sure. What is being announced is that this consolidation has been approved and will be going forward, so it could lead to shifts in ship availability, pricing globally, potentially affecting freight costs and vessel deployment decisions. Anytime there's kind of consolidation potentially could be a reduction in competition. But also, if all of the shipbuilding efforts that are happening on the US side come to full fruition right, it's not going to happen next year, but it might happen in the sooner rather than later time period, which who knows what that is, but it might happen sooner rather than later. And if that's true then there's going to be more global competition and perhaps that's what's being positioned here, so that China's shipbuilding is in a better overall business standpoint to compete against newer shipbuilding entities like perhaps the United States in years to come We'll see. But I wanted to flag this because obviously the story of the merger reflects a combination of very important, very large, very significant shipbuilding efforts out of China. But maybe there might be some other connections here. So I wanted to flag that for your attention.

Speaker 1: 7:09

Story number three the White House. You probably already heard about this. White House extends reciprocal tariffs through August 1st. The White House issued an executive order. I didn't realize it was actually came through in an executive order, but it's called extending the modification on the reciprocal tariff rates. So these are those IEEP tariffs.

Speaker 1: 7:29

The tariffs were originally implemented as a way to kind of rebalance US trade deficits with how they were being positioned and served as a negotiating tool is what we've been seeing most recently to influence trade deals and terms internationally. So why is this important? Why does this matter for the listeners here? For importers, this extension means that additional tariff costs will remain in effect for a variety of goods from multiple countries, not just China, continuing to impact supply chain budgets, pricing and sourcing strategies. Strategically, these tariffs represent an ongoing effort it seems right by the administration to reshape global trade relationships and it seems to be having that effect, and in turn, you could argue right that it's creating trading practices that maybe create more of a I want to say fair, but I think it's more of a rebalance is actually where I want to say what I want to go with that more of a rebalance of economic leverage and the trade imbalance that we've seen for years. As a United States country, we bring in much more than we export, as kind of a general statement. I think that's what some of this is getting at.

Speaker 1: 8:38

So, for carriers and logistics providers, continued tariff influence, shipping volumes and trade patterns across multiple trade lanes are going to be obviously affecting demand. We've already seen some routing changing for Asia West Coast. If you're watching some of the different routes, the ocean carriers in their liner service and their regularly scheduled service, and that's, if you weren't aware, that's kind of what containerized shipping. That's why the FMC regulates containerized shipping, because it's that liner service, that regularly scheduled service that the FMC oversees, and so you can watch. You can go onto the websites of some of these ocean carriers and see They'll make announcements on vessel schedule or vessel route changes, and sometimes you can see that there's trends that happen from different things happening with the tariffs, and so this is no exception to that. Obviously, businesses continue to prepare for ongoing tariff-related expenses.

Speaker 1: 9:30

I think everybody's just trying to figure it out as we go, but it looks like maybe August 1st is going to be a date that holds a little bit stronger than this July 9th and previously the April 9th. We'll see. I think that it's still trying to create this larger geopolitical context and negotiation strategy, so I mean, it's no help, but anything's at play, right? This is something that will continue to develop and we'll just keep watching it as it relates to ocean shipping, right? This is what I think, and I've said this before. I think what you can garner from some of these trade deals, though, is focus on the commodities that are moving around and some of the commodities that are being positioned in the trade deals, because that'll also help you know what ports are going to be busier than others, where commodities traditionally come in, because sometimes the commodities come in through certain ports, perhaps two or three ports, instead of all of them. Equally, because usually there's a little bit better infrastructure for certain commodities coming in. They can flip it, they can transload, they can do all these things with the commodity based through the infrastructure that's close to that port. So something to keep in mind as you're watching these trade deals come through. Perhaps look at them a little bit closely to see what commodities and if it affects your area of the supply chain world. All right.

Speaker 1: 10:48

Story number four the Federal Maritime Commission, because what is a by land, by sea episode Without talking about the FMC? The FMC, actually, it happened a while ago. I just I guess I didn't notice it. They reorganized a little bit of what they were doing and they actually created a competition section within the Office of the General Counsel that brings in economists from BTA. So that's the Bureau of Trade Analysis. So we previously had the General Counsel, and a reorg is not kind of a new thing. The FMC. Every once in a while, and usually with kind of new chairmen it can happen, but just sometimes, to realign with the mission and the work and the relevancy of some of the activities that the FMC does and overseas. They realign a little bit, just moving people around and creating a new, perhaps organizational chart. But here we have what it looks like to be a more of a focus on competition by creating a combo office. Essentially is what it is. Or I think bringing economists over from BTA to work with the lawyers in the Office of the General Counsel into this competition section. I think it's cool. I mean, I think that's what the entire agency does anyways. But to then have this specific competition section, I think really kind of roots it in the essence of what the FMC is for, the mission of the FMC. This new section brings together the agency's economic and legal expertise in one integrated unit aiming to strengthen oversight and enforcement of competition issues, of competition issues.

Speaker 1: 12:27

The only caution worry that I have here is the general counsel's office was already pretty lean. The Bureau of Trade Analysis was probably already pretty lean. The entire agency is definitely pretty lean, and what I mean by that is they only have anywhere between 115 to maybe even 140, when they're kind of like max capacity people working there, 115 to 140 or 150. I mean that's like a teeny, tiny company and they don't really have many people working there. So moving people around I mean the general counsel's office itself is usually like 10-ish people To now be moving some of those attorneys off of general GC work and into competitive work. Maybe it's just a reshifting of the manpower there. But also I'm curious to see if that has affected it, because obviously competition is where the FMC needs to remain focused. That's kind of their mission, right. They are essentially the competition authority, the independent regulatory agency, but the competition authority for ocean shipping for US interests. I mean, arguably it brings economists into the general counsel's office, so it might mean that economists can't be doing law work, but it might relieve some of that because now it's creating less of an administrative burden.

Speaker 1: 13:40

I mean you're moving from, I mean, ninth floor to the 10th floor. I mean that's, that's how it actually works. The FMC is two floors of a building and the economists are down not all of them, but a lot of them are down on the ninth floor and I think they've actually moved things around. But either way, perhaps having them kind of all in the same area has made that easier so they can say hey, what do you think about this? Yeah, that's what I think too, I don. They are running so lean and they are doing so much these days that I always just get a little bit nervous when I see movement or repositioning or new authorities or expansions of authorities, because they really need a bigger budget and more people if they are going to continue to work at this higher frequency that they've been doing. So we'll see, we'll see.

Speaker 1: 14:28

But I came across that Federal Register notice and I thought that that was interesting. So I wanted to do this new little segment called Maritime Minute. Like I said, I'm kind of trying out these new little segments, but I wanted to do the Maritime Minute, where we bring you what you need to know in a minute or so. So the Maritime Minute today is FMC agreement category. So we've been talking a lot about the order to show cause issued by the FMC against the World Shipping Council. But it's kind of garnered up some questions about agreements at the FMC generally. So I put this in a LinkedIn post.

Speaker 1: 15:02

But when agreements are properly filed with the FMC, and I say that because they have to go through certain qualifications or certain categories of why and how agreements are filed at the FMC. But when they are properly filed at the FMC they receive limited antitrust immunity, meaning that conduct that might otherwise be considered monopolistic is allowed because the FMC has oversight over that limited antitrust immunity, that agreement and also kind of the law's boundaries. It has parameters over that agreement. So if an agreement's purpose or activities fall outside the FMC's regulatory scope, that immunity can be challenged and revoked, meaning those activities might not be legally allowed to continue. So what are the agreement types?

Speaker 1: 15:48

And I think we're probably already at a minute, so this maybe is the maritime minutes section, but we have quite a few different agreements and I just wanted to hit them quickly just so that you had exposure to them. So we have the vessel sharing agreements. We often talk about these in their larger version they are global vessel sharing agreements or the alliances. So this is where shipping lines share vessel space on specific trade lanes, with space allocated differently per port or vessel sharing, but on a global scale. And those are the alliances, covering multiple trade routes under one agreement. Space charter agreements are also a thing. That's where one carrier provides vessel space to another for compensation or services without rationalizing capacity. We have rate discussion agreements, so allows carriers or terminal operators to discuss or agree on rates or charges, binding or non-binding. An example of this would be West Coast of South America discussion agreement. So this is and these are actually taken right off of the FMC's website. So if you would like to dive into any of these agreements, feel free to jump over to their website under the agreements category category and you'll see examples that you can go click through.

Speaker 1: 16:53

Cooperative working agreement is the one that has come recently into attention with this order to show cause. So cooperative working agreements establish exclusive or cooperative working relationships not covered by other specific agreements. They're kind of a catch-all, which is why this is an interesting one that the FMC has done the order to show cause with the World Shipping Council. We also have assessment agreements providing collective bargained fringe benefit obligations, often related to labor agreements. This was something when we were talking about the ILA stuff I was like, oh, I didn't realize the ILA files it with the FMC.

Speaker 1: 17:28

Conference agreements. Carriers agree to fix uniform tariff charges and conditions for passengers or cargo on specific routes. These conference agreements mostly circled out I think maybe entirely circled out with OSRA 1998. Yes, that's right, there was an OSRA before 2022. There was an OSRA 1998, which was a deregulatory effort, but for the most part conferences kind of went away and now we see these global alliances as kind of what's come in current day. We also have equipment discretion agreements, self-explanatory joint service agreements. Carriers operate jointly under a single brand with independent rates, tariffs and billing. Joint venture agreements, maritime terminal facilities agreements, maritime services agreements. And that's the round out. That's your maritime minute brief-ish, clear and maritime. Look, that's it for today. If you liked this episode, be sure to follow, subscribe and leave a review.

Speaker 1: 18:17

We missed a section. I can't believe it. I'm going to see if I can actually pull it back up, because we were talking about e-bills of lading and for some reason it didn't make it into my script and so we are flying free here. I'm going to go try to pull that section up from my notes, because I'm not sure why it didn't make it in here. So let me get that. And this is where live meets recorded. This is where live meets recorded. So the e-bill of lading is such an interesting new development and I wanted to make sure that we did not miss it. Let me see. Here comes my notes. Dramatic pause, here we go.

Speaker 1: 19:14

Story number five. So this is a story from the JOC. This story was a fantastic story, all but brief but, I think, for the significance of what's happening here. So Eric Johnson from Journal of Commerce actually wrote this story and I'm going to quote him from the very beginning because I think that he does a really good job kind of presenting what happened here. So US Bank has completed its first trade finance transaction using a digital ocean bill of lading. Another small step toward the industry's intent to transition to 100% digital bill of lading by 2030. Disclosed by US Bank on Thursday was facilitated by electronic bills of lading software vendor WaveBL for a US-based exporter using Mediterranean shipping company MSC, which issued the EBL. That's all a quote from Eric's article.

Speaker 1: 20:01

So this milestone and I think that it should be considered such this milestone highlights US Bank's pilot program to adopt electronic bills of lading for US exporters. It's a key move to modernize global trade documentation. This traditional paper bill of lading serves as proof of cargo ownership, a receipt, a contract. But it can be slow and the traditional bill right, it's a piece of paper. Why does this matter? The successful transaction is proof of concept that EBLs electronic bills of lading can work effectively in real world trade finance. It demonstrates how digitization can speed up processes, reduce fraud risk and enable faster access to financing. By proving this model, it helps build confidence among exporters, banks, carriers, in this adoption of EBLs. More broadly, electronic bills of lading are truly about to, and currently transforming shipping by enabling these faster financing, lower fraud risk and improving supply chain transparency. This transaction marks a pivotal step toward the maritime industry's goal of full digital transformation by 2030, like I said, and now it's happened. Maritime industry's goal of full digital transformation by 2030, like I said, and now it's happened. Us banks have successfully completed the first trade finance transaction using the CBL. This isn't just talk or theory anymore, and I should say in the US right, this is something that is important that this was US bank in the US. This milestone proves the industry is moving from concept to reality, ushering a new area of faster, safer and more efficient global shipping, and I am so delighted to see it. So, as part of our ongoing policy to port series right, we have all these series.

Speaker 1: 21:37

Now. Three questions AI edition that you might have about EBLs and quick answers to help you understand the impact. So, number one how will the transition to electronic bills of lading affect my current workflows? Look, transitioning to EBLs can streamline your workflows by replacing paper with fast digital documents. Right, I mean it's basically going from snail mail in the mailbox at the end of your driveway to email, right? Speeding approvals, reducing errors, boosting overall efficiency. It's an opportunity to modernize processes and improve collaboration through some system updates and training may be needed, but really there are standards involved with EBLs. That is going to make this a lot faster than you might otherwise think.

Speaker 1: 22:19

What regulatory hurdles affect EBLs? Well, speaking of standards, the Digital Container Shipping Association, dcsa, released a report on legal and regulatory barriers. So while they identified that there's still some barriers that exist out there, one of the most important things in general for EBLs, as just kind of a blanket statement, is that express acceptance by countries around the world will help give confidence to all parties that an EBL holds the same legal weight as a fiscal bill of lading, help give confidence to all parties that an EBL holds the same legal weight as a fiscal bills lading. That is something that I would love to see happen as just a kind of if we're going to go for EBLs, we need to have these express acceptance by countries and whatever that form looks like in adoption, but if we're going to go EBL, it needs to have some sort of legal acceptance, right? I guess I can't say it any other way, but go check out DCSA's report on legal and regulatory barriers. It's really interesting. It breaks it down country by country where they think that there are really good advances whereas there's still some barriers. On EBL specifically and I say speaking of standards, digital Container Shipping Association also has a whole bunch of standards. They are, I mean, I'll say it, the leading standard setting body for global ocean shipping out there. So go take a look at DCSA anyways, but go take a look at that report.

Speaker 1: 23:37

So the last question how can smaller exporters adopt EBLs without high upfront costs? Well, in this pilot, in this example, in this I shouldn't even say example In this successful initiative, wave BL offers accessible cloud-based platform designed for businesses. Subscription models are often a way of having exporters adopting electronic bills of lading gradually and cost-effective. There are ways out there. I encourage you to look up Wave BL. I think that it's a fantastic company to see if you are interested in getting into EBL and this isn't even sponsored by Wave BL. But I think Wave BL is a great way to kind of make the first step. You know, kind of dip your toe in, see what Wave BL is all about, because they've done a proof of concept here.

Speaker 1: 24:28

So, story number six I can't believe five and six got left off my script, but here we go. Story number six are we missing executive leadership in maritime? And this is kind of, I guess, an opinion piece here, which all of it really is, but this is more of a reflective opinion piece from me. Recently, dr Sal Mercogliano of what's Going On With Shipping, a friend of the show asked a critical question on his podcast and I've been thinking about it and I think I tend to agree Are we missing executive leadership on a large scale in maritime right now? And I don't think that we are. Well, let me tell you what I think about this. Let me explain it.

Speaker 1: 25:09

So remember how maritime was highlighted as one of the top five issues by this administration. Right, it was specifically called out by President Trump in his speech to Congress, in his final speech, as his speechwriters, signaling big momentum and focus on maritime shipbuilding. Right, we were talking about an office of shipbuilding. We had so much initiative, inertia. That happened during TPM in March. It was so exciting and lately I don't know.

Speaker 1: 25:35

Look, I don't know if it's a summertime slowdown or if it really is a lack of breeze filling our sails, but something feels like it's slowing down and I'm hoping that it's maybe just a summertime slowdown. I'm encouraged because next week there's kind of this impromptu sale into the American School Counselors Association. It's an annual conference in Long Beach that's happening. There are lots of maritime interests that are going to be there in the expo section and they're going to be expanding exposure to a maybe unsuspecting group of school counselors who maybe know not much about maritime. But by next week, by golly they will and look, hopefully they're going to be expanding exposure and attracting new talent. But we need I can't get, I just want to get back to this leadership thing. We need leadership roles filled to truly capitalize on this energy and to get us back on course. Right, let's call it a summertime slowdown, let's get back into it by the fall when we have the Maritime Action Plan due.

Speaker 1: 26:32

Maybe it's all just kind of in the background now and everybody's still working hard, but look, the FMC, the Chairman Lusola, just departed, right June 30th. The commission now has five seats three for the majority party, two for the minority party. That's how it normally works. But currently we only have one in the majority party seat, that's Commissioner Rebecca Dye, and we have two Democrats. So what otherwise would be three Republicans, two Democrats in a Republican presidency? We have one Republican and two Democrats. Maffei and Vekic are fantastic commissioners, but it leaves the majority at a disadvantage and the chairman position remains unfilled.

Speaker 1: 27:11

I was so encouraged when Chairman Sola was named January 20th that we had FMC leadership right off the bat. I was hoping that with a July excuse me flip of the calendar we might have seen a chairman die just to get things scooting, so that we at least had if we were going to have only one on the majority side, at least we had leadership clearly defined there. I mean, she is the only Republican in the FMC right now, so she kind of probably is unofficially the leader of what's happening and the activities and the initiatives coming out of the FMC and kind of seeing through what SOLA had started and all of them had started. But we need the leader there. We need the leader.

Speaker 1: 27:59

And on the maritime side, maritime Administration, marad right, we're still waiting for the confirmation of Steve Carmel from Maritime Limited. This is something that Sal Mercogliano was really talking about. We have a deputy maritime administrator saying, yee, he's acting in the role, great progress. But the Maritime Transportation System National Advisory Committee, mitsnac, hasn't yet fully been activated and these members are ready and eager, almost as if saying put us in coach. And I mention MITSNAC because when USTR was giving their proposals on the port fees, they talked a lot about having their federal advisory committee right by their side informing their decisions, helping to guide them as they were creating proposals for the port fees. I think that the MITSNAC could serve that purpose and hasn't been fully activated yet. And with the lack of some of these roles being filled in the maritime sector, I think that MITSNAC is an important piece to have that private engagement that we have, the public sector, but we need the private engagement, the industry engagement from this 20 plus member advisory committee. We see National Shipper Advisory Committee of the FMC very active Mid-snack. It's time to get it scooting again, adding to the leadership gap too. Sal talked about this.

Speaker 1: 29:18

The National Security Council experienced what's been called kind of a Maritime Day shakeup shortly after Maritime Day. They lost a few key maritime-focused members. They were repositioned in other positions in the federal government, but it's important that we still have that excitement and that strong presence in the White House through the National Security Council on maritime. Right, we have this executive order on maritime dominance and we just passed the 90-day mark from the executive order, meaning it was April 9th, it was July 8th. That was the 90-day mark for that. Most deadlines for reports that go to the National Security Council, for the most part, right, they kind of go all over but go to the National Security Council. I would hope that we get that fully staffed up and maybe I just don't know what's happening there. Right, it's not like these are publicly announced positions of leadership under maritime and NSC positions of leadership under maritime and NSC. But we need these reports to come into a fully staffed maritime so that we can turn them into a maritime action plan, which is due 210 days from the executive order, which is this November 5th date. We still have three different categories under the executive order timeline. We have the maritime action plan, which is due 210 days, which is that November 5th, like I just mentioned. We also have two others that are still outstanding. So we have Ensuring the Security and Resilience of the Maritime Industrial Base. That's 180 days after that April 9th date, so that puts us at October 6th. And we also have Increasing the Fleet of Commercial Vessels Trading Internationally Under the US Flag another section of the executive order 180 days from that April 9th, october 6th.

Speaker 1: 30:52

So what does all this mean? Why am I kind of making this opinion piece? I think Sal had it right on. I think that we need this full executive leadership, a robust National Security Council maritime team ready to act. And the thing that I'm adding on is I think that we need this federal advisory committee, this Maritime Transportation System National Advisory Committee, right there, step in step, because it gives you industry that's ready, available, willing to work. I've been doing fantastic recommendations through the last charter and through many, many charters, but also a captive industry audience that they can bounce ideas off of, and I think that's how USTR was using their federal advisory committee.

Speaker 1: 31:30

It's time for some of these leadership roles to be filled. Look, congress, if you're listening, let's get going. Let's get these filled. And for Marriott and DOT, let's get these advisory groups activated. Let's keep maritime moving forward. Let's call this just a summertime slowdown, but let's be reinvigorated, re-energized and let's move forward into a really active and exciting Maritime Action Plan, because I think what this is kind of being seen as is perhaps a National Maritime Strategy, and that's something that I can't tell you how many years a National Maritime Strategy has both been attempted but also called for, pined for. I guess I should say so we'll see what happens next.

Speaker 1: 32:13

I'm still encouraged, I'm still excited, I still think that maritime is more in the nightly news than it ever has been, and I love it right. I think that it's great to have so many maritime issues on the forefront, that maritime security is national security, and so I thought that it was appropriate to have maritime as part of the National Security Council. I just want to see it continue, I want to see it keep going and maybe now it's just when the work's happening in the background. But we need a little bit more. We need a little bit more of a yes, we see the maritime industry, we're still moving forward and we still have the engagement. So that's it for today. Now, that actually is it for today.

Speaker 1: 32:52

If you liked this episode, be sure to follow, subscribe and leave a review. Want to go deeper or bring this insight to your team. Visit themaritimeprofessorcom for corporate trainings, tailored briefings and on-demand webinars, and if your organization needs help navigating the legal or strategic side of ocean shipping, head over to Squall Strategies. That's where I provide consulting services, regulatory guidance and policy support for clients working directly with federal agencies and across the global supply chain. As always, this podcast is for educational purposes only and not legal advice. If you need an attorney, contact an attorney. Until next time, this is Lauren Began. I'm the Maritime Professor and you've just listened to my Land and my Sea. See you next time.